Skip to main content

Full text of "The works of Charles Sumner"

See other formats 


Google 


This  is  a  digital  copy  of  a  book  that  was  preserved  for  generations  on  library  shelves  before  it  was  carefully  scanned  by  Google  as  part  of  a  project 

to  make  the  world's  books  discoverable  online. 

It  has  survived  long  enough  for  the  copyright  to  expire  and  the  book  to  enter  the  public  domain.  A  public  domain  book  is  one  that  was  never  subject 

to  copyright  or  whose  legal  copyright  term  has  expired.  Whether  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  may  vary  country  to  country.  Public  domain  books 

are  our  gateways  to  the  past,  representing  a  wealth  of  history,  culture  and  knowledge  that's  often  difficult  to  discover. 

Marks,  notations  and  other  maiginalia  present  in  the  original  volume  will  appear  in  this  file  -  a  reminder  of  this  book's  long  journey  from  the 

publisher  to  a  library  and  finally  to  you. 

Usage  guidelines 

Google  is  proud  to  partner  with  libraries  to  digitize  public  domain  materials  and  make  them  widely  accessible.  Public  domain  books  belong  to  the 
public  and  we  are  merely  their  custodians.  Nevertheless,  this  work  is  expensive,  so  in  order  to  keep  providing  tliis  resource,  we  liave  taken  steps  to 
prevent  abuse  by  commercial  parties,  including  placing  technical  restrictions  on  automated  querying. 
We  also  ask  that  you: 

+  Make  non-commercial  use  of  the  files  We  designed  Google  Book  Search  for  use  by  individuals,  and  we  request  that  you  use  these  files  for 
personal,  non-commercial  purposes. 

+  Refrain  fivm  automated  querying  Do  not  send  automated  queries  of  any  sort  to  Google's  system:  If  you  are  conducting  research  on  machine 
translation,  optical  character  recognition  or  other  areas  where  access  to  a  large  amount  of  text  is  helpful,  please  contact  us.  We  encourage  the 
use  of  public  domain  materials  for  these  purposes  and  may  be  able  to  help. 

+  Maintain  attributionTht  GoogXt  "watermark"  you  see  on  each  file  is  essential  for  in  forming  people  about  this  project  and  helping  them  find 
additional  materials  through  Google  Book  Search.  Please  do  not  remove  it. 

+  Keep  it  legal  Whatever  your  use,  remember  that  you  are  responsible  for  ensuring  that  what  you  are  doing  is  legal.  Do  not  assume  that  just 
because  we  believe  a  book  is  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  the  United  States,  that  the  work  is  also  in  the  public  domain  for  users  in  other 
countries.  Whether  a  book  is  still  in  copyright  varies  from  country  to  country,  and  we  can't  offer  guidance  on  whether  any  specific  use  of 
any  specific  book  is  allowed.  Please  do  not  assume  that  a  book's  appearance  in  Google  Book  Search  means  it  can  be  used  in  any  manner 
anywhere  in  the  world.  Copyright  infringement  liabili^  can  be  quite  severe. 

About  Google  Book  Search 

Google's  mission  is  to  organize  the  world's  information  and  to  make  it  universally  accessible  and  useful.   Google  Book  Search  helps  readers 
discover  the  world's  books  while  helping  authors  and  publishers  reach  new  audiences.  You  can  search  through  the  full  text  of  this  book  on  the  web 

at|http: //books  .google  .com/I 


;db,Googlc 


;db,Googlc 


WORKS 


CHAELES    SUMNER. 


BOSTON; 
LEE    AND    SHEPAED. 

1875. 


;db,Googlc 


Entered  aocoraing  to  Act  of  Congreas,  in  the  jearlSTl, 
a  the  Office  of  the  Ubrarian  of  CongMsa,  at  WflsUngton. 


■cibyGoogIc 


CONTENTS   OF   VOLUME  HI. 


Welcome  to  Kohbhth.    Speech  in  the  Senate,  December  10, 1851  , 

Onn   COUHTBY  OK  THE   SlDB  OP   FREEDOM,  WITHOUT   BelLIOERENT 

IhtebvbMTION.    Letter  to  a  Philadelphia  Committee,  December 
23,1861    ■. 

Clemency  to  Political  Offendehs.  Letter  to  an  Iriah  Festiyal  at 
Washington,  January  22,  18B2  ....... 

Justice  to  the  Land  States,  and  Policy  or  Goads.  Spooohes  in 
tha  Senate,  on  the  Iowa  Eailroad  Bill,  Jaiioary  27,  February  17, 
and  March  16  1862  .        ,        .        , 

J.  Fenimoee  CooPEn,  the  Novelist.  Letter  to  the  Rev.  Eufus  W. 
GriBWold,  Febi-uary  22, 1352    ,..,.... 

Cheap  Oceah  Postage.  Speech  in  the  Senate,  on  a  Resolution  in 
Eelation  to  Cheap  Ocean  Postage,  March  3, 1852   .        .        .        - 

Pahdonihq  Powek  m  the  Presidest.  Opinion  anbmitted  to 
the  President,  May  11, 1862,  on  the  Application  for  the  Pardon 
of  Drayton  and  Sayros,  incarcerated  at  Washington  for  helping 
the  Escape  of  Slaves 

Pbbbentation  of  a  Memobial  against  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Bill..    Remarlts  i^  the  Senate,  May  26,  1853     .... 

The  Nationai.  Flag  the  Emblem  or  Union  pob  Freedom. 
Letter  to  the  Boston  Committoo  for  the  Celebration  of  th.B  4lh  of 
July,  1863 

Union  against  the  Sectiosaustm  of  Siaverv.  Letter  to  a  Free- 
Soil  ConvenUon  at  Worcester,  July  6, 1852 


■cibyGoogIc 


IV  CONTESTS. 

"Strike,  but  Heak":  Attempt  to  uiscrss  the  Fugitivb 
Si^VE  Bill.  EeinBrks  in  tbe  Senate,  on  laking  up  tlio  Eeso- 
iutioti  instructing  the  Committee  on  tha  Judiciary  to  report  a  Bill 
for  Immediate  Bapeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  July  27  and 
as,  1862 jg 

Teibute  to  Robert  Rantoul,  Jr.    Speech  in  the  Senate,  on  the 

Death  of  Hon.  Robert  Bantoul,  Jr.,  August  9, 1862         ...      76 

Authorship  of  the  Ohdinancb  of  Fkp.edom  in  the  North- 
west TKBBiTOKir.    Latter  to  Hon.  Edward  Coles,  August  23, 1862     83 

FHEarNiM  National,  Slavery  Sectiomal.  Speech  in  the  Senate, 
on  a  Motion  to  repeal  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  August  26,  lS6a      .      87 

ASDEEW    J.     DOWKIHG,    THE    LANDSCAPE    GaKDESEB,        Speech    [u 

the  Senato,  in  Favor  of  an  AUownnee  to  Iho  Widow  of  the  Jate 
Andrew  J.  Downing,  August  26, 1862 ie7 

The  Party  ov  Freedom;  Its  Necessity  akd  Practicabilitt. 
Speech  at  the  State  Convention  of  llie  Free-Soil  Party  of  Mqbbb^ 
cliusettB,  held  at  Lowell,  September  IS,  1863 199 

Civil  Soperinterdbsts  of  Ahmohies.  Speech  in  tha  Senate,  on 
the  Proposition  to  change  the  Superintendents  of  Armories,  F«b- 
niary  23, 1863 jOB 

Necessity  of  Union  to  urHOLD  Freedom.  Letter  to  a  Rhode 
Island  Committee,  March  26, 1S5B 211 

AoArasT  Secbbcy  ih  Phoceboikgs  of  the  Senate.  Speech  in 
the  Senate,  on  the  Propoaition  to  limit  the  Secret  Sessions  of  the 

.     213 


Powers  of  the  State 
Speech  in  Convent io 
Massachusetts.  June 


The  Pacific  Railroad  and  the  IIeclaratiow  op  Indepek- 
DESCE.  Letter  lo  the  Mayor  of  Boston,  for  tho  Celebration  of 
July  4,  1863 ; 


■cibyGoogIc 


CONTENTS. 

P. 
The  Ekphesebtative  System,  abd  its  proper  Basis,    Speech 
on  fhe  Proposition  to  amend  the  Basis  of  the  Honse  of  Bepresen- 
tativea  of  Mnsaachuaetta,  in  the  Convention  to  revise  and  amend 
Bib  Constitution  of  that  State,  July  7,  1S53        .       ■       .       .    1 

Bills  of  Bights;  Theib  History  and  Powcy.  Speech  on  the 
Report  from  the  Committee  on  tlie  Bill  of  Bights,  in  the  Conven- 
tion to  revise  and  amend  the  Constitution  of  Massnohusetta,  July 


Fibgeb-Point  from  Pltmootb  Rock.  Speech  at  tlio  PlymouUi 
Festival  in  Commemorntion  of  tlie  Embarkation  of  tlie  Pilgrims, 
August  1,  1863 ! 

Ibelahd  AMD  Ieishmen.    Letter  to  a  Committee  of  Irlsh-bqrn  Citi- 


TBE     LASDMARIt    OF    FREEDOM!    NO     RBPEAL     OF     t 

CoMPBOHisE.  Speacli  in  the  Senate,  against  the  Repeal  of  the 
Missouri  Prohibition  of  Slavery  north  of  36°  30'  in  the  Nebraska 
and  Kansas  BiU,  February  21,  1S51 377 

■When  ivili.  the  North  be  aroused?  Letter  to  a  Personal 
Friepd,  March  30,  1654 ■ .       .       .333 

A  LinERTT-LoviNfi  Emigration  to  oitard  Kansas.    Letter  to  a 

Massachusetts  Committee,  May  1,  X861 gg4 

Final  Protebt,  fob  HursELF  and  the  Clergy  op  New  Kno- 
lakd,  against  Scavery  in  Neokaska  and  Kansas.  Speecli 
in  the  Senate,  on  the  Night  of  tlie  Final  Passage  of  the  Nebraska 
and  Kansa    B  B36 

Union  of  all      Ttrra    keo  o      st  the  Slave  Power. 

Letter  to  C  mm   Ce         ay  29,  18S4  .        .         .363 

Boston  Perrn  the   B  the   FuGmvB  Slavb 

Act.    Spe  Bos  on  Petition  for  tlie  Ke- 

peal  of  th    F  gi         S  18B4     .        .        .        .355 

Eeplt  to  As         nt       0  ur      r  the  Comstitution; 


■cibyGoogIc 


VI  COXTENTS. 

No  Pension  for  SERvroK  in  Support  of  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Act.  Minority  Beplt  to  the  SenHta  of  the  United  StateB,  on  the 
Bill  granting  to  the  Widow  of  Jamas  Batoheldet  a  Provision  for 
her  fiiturB  Support,  July  18,  3854 , 

James  Otis  as  Eiahplb  to  Massachusetts.  Letter  (a  the  Cape 
Cod  Association  of  MasaaohtiBetls,  July  30, 1864  .       .       ,       .    . 

Struggle  for  Rbpeal  of  thb  Fugitive  Slave  Act.  Debate  in 
the  Senate,  July  31,  1854 , 

Ddtibb  of  Massachusetts  at  thk  present  Crisis.  Forjiation 
OS  THE  Republican  Partv.  Speech  before  the  Eepnblican 
State  Convention  at  Worcester,  Septembar  7, 1854        ,       .       .    i 

The  Good  Farmer  and  the  Good  CrnzEN.  Letter  to  the  Nor- 
folk AgnoulCnral  Society,  September  36, 16ri4        .        .         .        .    A 

The  Fugitive  Slave  Act  to  ee  disobetkd.  Letter  to  a  Com- 
inittaeatSyi'acuse,  New  York,  September  28,  1854        .        .        .     i 

PoamoH  AND  Duties  op  the  Merchant,  illubteathd  by  the 
Life  of  Granville  SiiABt.  Address  before  the  Mercantile 
Library  Association  of  Boston,  on  tha  Evening  of  November  18, 
186i 4 

Wages  rw  Seamen  in  cabe  of  Wreck.  Speech  In  the  Senate,  on 
intrortuoing  a  Bill  to  secure  W^es  to  Seamen  in  Case  of  Wreck, 
February  12, 1855 6 

Against  Capitai.  Punishment.  Latter  to  a  Committee  of  the 
Massachusetts  Legislature,  February  12, 1866         ....    5 

Thb  Demands  of  Freedom  ;  Repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Act.  Speech  in  tha  Senate  ngainst  Mr.  Toucey's  Bill,  and  for  the 
EepeiJ  oi  tlie  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  February  23, 1855      ...    6; 


■cibyGoogIc 


WELCOME  TO  KOSSUTH. 

PEECH  IK   THE   Senate,    December   10,    1S51. 


Mn.  Sbmn-er's  credentials  as  Senator  were  presented  at  the  opening 
of  the  32d  Congress,  Deceralier  1,  1851,  when  he  took  the  oath  of  office. 
Among  those  who  took  tho  oath  on  the  same  day  were  Hon.  Benjamin 
F,  Wade,  of  Ohio,  Hon.  HamOton  Fish,  of  New  York,  and  Hon.  Ste- 
phen R.  Mallory,  of  Florida,  afterward  Seeretaiy  of  the  Navy  in  the 
Eebel  GoTemmettt.  The  seat  of  the  last  was  contested,  and  the 
question  on  his  reception  drew  forth  Mr.  Clay,  who  was  present  for 
the  last  time  in  the  Senate.  Thoogh  liTing  till  June,  he  never  again 
appeared  in  the  Gliamber.  On  the  arrangement  of  the  Committees, 
Mr.  Sumner  found  himself  at  the  bottom  of  the  Committee  on  Eevo- 
lutionary  Claims  and  the  Committee  on  Eoads  and  Canals. 

On  the  first  day  of  the  session  a  joint  resolution  was  announced  by 
Mr.  Foote,  of  Mississippi,  providing  for  the  reception  and  entertain- 
ment of  l/ouis  KoEsnth,  the  recent  head  of  the  revolutionary  govern- 
ment in  Hungary.  Governor  Kossuth,  having  escaped  from  Hungary, 
had  found  rdvige  in  Turkey,  where  he  was  received  on  board  one  of 
our  ships  of  war.  After  an  interesting  visit  in  England,  where  he  ad- 
dressed large  public  audiences  with  singular  power  and  eloquence,  he 
sirived  in  New  York.  Interest  in  the  cause  which  he  so  ably  repre- 
sented, and  personal  symxiathy  with  the  exile,  quickened  by  his  genius, 
found  univeisal  expression  in  the  country  ;  but  there  was  a  protracted 
debate  in  the  Senate  before  the  vote  was  taken. 

The  debate  proceeded  on  a  resolution  introduced  by  Mr.  Seward, 
as  follows :  — 


"  Resolved,  ^c,  That  the  Congress  of  the  United  States,  in  ttie  name  and 
behalf  of  the  people  of  the  United  States,  give  to  Louia  Kosauth  a  cordial 
welcome  to  the  capital  and  to  tho  country,  and  that  a  copy  of  this  resolu- 
tion be  transmitted  to  him  by  the  President  of  the  United  Slates." 

On  the  same  day,  Mr.  Shields,  of  Illinois,  introduced  a  resolution  in 
the  following  terms  ;  — 


;db,Googlc 


Z  WELCOME    TO    KOSSUTH. 

"Resolved,  That  a  oomniitlaB  of  three  be  appointed  by  the  Chair  to  wait 
on  Louis  Kossuth,  Governor  of  Hungary,  and  introduce  him  to  Ibe  Sennta." 

Decsmbsr  0th,  Mr.  Berrien,  of  Georgia,  addressed  the  Senate  at 
length  in  opposition  to  action  by  Congress,  and,  in  closing  his  speech, 
moved  the  following  amendment :  — 

"And  beiCfurlher  Benilved,  That  the  welcome  thns  afforded  to  Louis 
Koaauth  be  extended  to  his  associates  who  have  landed  on  our  shores;  but 
while  welcoming  these  Hungarian  patriots  to  an  asylum  in  our  country,  and 
to  the  prolection  which  our  laws  do  and  always  will  aiTord  to  them,  it  is  due 
to  candor  to  declare  that  it  is  not  the  purpose  of  Congress  to  depart  fram  the 
settled  policy  of  this  Government,  which  forbids  all  inlerferance  with  the 
domestjc  ccncems  of  other  nations." 

The  final  qneation  was  not  reached  till  December  12th,  when  the 
amendment  of  Mr.  Berrien  was  rejected :  yeas  15,  nays  26.  The  ques- 
tion then  recurred  on  the  resolution  of  Mr.  Seward,  which  was  adopted : 
yeas  33,  nays  8.  The  resolution  passed  the  House  of  Eeproscntativea, 
and  was  s^ed  by  the  President. 

On  the  10th  of  December  Mr,  Sumner  spoke.  !t  was  his  first  speech 
in  the  Senate.  He  rose  to  speak  late  in  the  afternoon  of  the  day  before, 
but  gave  way  to  an  adjonmment,  which  was  moved  by  Mr.  Rusk,  of 
Texas.  The  next  day,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Seward,  the  Senate  proceed- 
ed to  the  consideration  of  the  resolution,  when  Mr.  Sumner  took  the 

The  foUowing  ohaiactsristic  letter  from  Mr.  Choate,  one  of  his  prede- 
cessors as  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  illustrates  the  reception  of  the 
speech  in  the  country,  besides  being  a  souvenir  of  friendly  relations 
amidst  political  differences. 

"BoaroH,  December  29, 1861. 
' '  My  dear  Mb.  Sijmhbb,  — 

"I  thank  yon  for  the  copy  of  yom  beautiful  speech,  and  for  the  mak- 
ing of  it.  All  men  say  it  was  a  successful  one,  parliamentarily  express- 
ing it ;  and  I  am  sure  it  is  sound  and  safe,  steering  skilfully  between 
cold-ahmtldeHsm  and  in!Mspitelity,  on  the  one  side,  and  the  splendid 
folly  and  wickedness  of  cooperation,  on  the  other.  Cover  the  Magyar 
with  flowers,  lave  him  with  perftimes,  serenade  him  with  eloquence, 
and  let  him  go  home  alone,  —  if  he  will  not  live  here.  •  Such  is  all  that 
is  permitted  to  wise  states,  aspiiing  to  the  '  True  Grandeur.' 

"  I  wish  to  Heaven  you  would  wiite  me  de  rebus  Cimgressus.     How 
does  the  Senate  strike  you  ?    The  best  place  this  day  on  earth  for  rea- 
soned and  thoughtful,  yet  stimulant  public  speech.     Think  of  that. 
"  Most  truly  yours  —  m  Hie  Union,  — 

"RuFUS  Choatb." 


■cibyGoogIc 


WELCOME  TO   KOSSUTH, 


MR  PRESIDENT,  — Words  are  sometimes  things; 
and  I  cannot  disguise  from  myself  that  the  reso- 
lution in  honor  of  Louis  Kossuth  now  pending  hefore 
the  Senate,  when  finally  passed,  will  be  an  act  of  no 
small  significance  in  the  history  of  our  country.  The 
Senator  from  Georgia  [Mr.  Bekeies]  was  right,  when 
he  said  that  it  was  no  immeaning  compliment.  Beyond 
its  immediate  welcome  to  an  illustrious  stranger,  it  wQl 
help  to  combine  and  direct  the  sentiments  of  our  own 
people  everywhere ;  it  will  inspire  aU  in  other  lands 
who  are  engaged  in  the  contest  for  freedom ;  it  will 
challenge  the  disturbed  attention  of  despote  ;  and  will 
become  a  precedent,  whose  importance  wiU  grow,  in  the 
thick-coming  events  of  the  future,  with  the  growing 
might  of  the  Eepublic.  Therefore  it  becomes  us  to  con- 
sider well  what  we  do,  and  to  understand  the  grounds 
of  our  conduct, 

I  am  prepared  to  vote  for  it  without  amendment 
or  condition  of  any  kind,  and  on  reasons  which  seem 
to  me  at  once  obvious  and  conclusive.  In  assigning 
these  I  shall  he  brief;  and  let  me  say,  that,  novice 
as  I  am  in  this  hall,  and,  indeed,  in  all  legislative 
halls,  nothing  but  my  strong  interest  in  the  question 
as  now  presented,  and  a  hope  to  say  something  directly 
upon  it,  could  prompt  me  thus  early  to  mingle  in  these 
debates. 

The  case  seems  to  require  a  statement,  rather  than  an 
argument  As  I  understand,  the  last  Congress  requested 
the  President  to  authorize  the  employment  of  a  nation- 
al vessel  to  receive  and  convey  Louis  Kossuth  to  the 
United  States.  That  honorable  service  was  performed, 
under  the  express  direction  of  the  President,  and  in  pur- 


■cibyGooglc 


4  ■WELCOME    TO   KOSSUTH. 

suance  of  the  vote  of  Congress,  by  one  of  tlie  "best  ap- 
pointed ships  of  our  navy,- — the  steam-frigate  Mississippi. 
Far  away  irom  our  country,  in  fore^  waters,  on  the 
current  of  the  Bosphorus,  the  Hungarian  chief,  passiag 
from  liis  Turkish  exUe,  first  pressed  tlie  deck  of  this 
gallant  vessel,  first  came  under  the  protection  of  our  na- 
tional flag,  and  for  the  first  time  in  his  life  rested  be- 
neath the  ensign  of  an  unquestioned  Eepubhc.  From 
tliat  moment  he  became  our  guest.  The  Kepublic  -^ 
which  thus  far  he  had  seen  only  in  delighted  dream  or 
vision  —  was  now  his  host;  and  though  this  relation 
was  interrupted  for  a  few  weeks  by  his  wise  and  bril- 
liant visit  to  Ei^Iand,  yet  its  duties  and  its  pleasures,  as 
I  confidently  submit,  are  not  yet  ended.  The  liberated 
exile  is  now  at  our  gates.  Sir,  we  cannot  do  things  by 
halves ;  and  tlie  hospitality,  which,  under  the  auspices 
of  Congress,  was  thus  b^un,  must,  under  the  auspices 
of  Congress,  be  continued.  The  hearts  of  the  people 
are  already  open  to  receive  him ;  Congress  cannot  turn 
its  back  upon  him. 

I  would  join  in  this  welcome,  not  merely  because  it 
is  essential  to  complete  and  crown  the  work  of  the  last 
Congress,  but  because  our  guest  deserves  it.  Tlie  dis- 
tinction is  great,  I  know ;  but  it  is  not  so  great  as  his 
deserts.  He  deserves  it  as  the  early,  constant,  and  in- 
corruptible champion  of  the  Liberal  Cause  in  Hui^ry, 
who,  while  yet  young,  with  unconscious  power,  girded 
himself  for  the  contest,  and  by  a  series  of  masterly  la- 
bors, with  voice  and  pen,  in  parliamentary  debate  and  in 
the  discussions  of  the  press,  breathed  into  his  country 
the  breath  of  life.  He  deserves  it  by  the  great  princi- 
ples of  true  democracy  which  he  caused  to  be  recognized, 
■ —  representation  of  the  people  without  distinction  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


WELCOME  TO   KOSSUTH.  5 

rank  ot  'birth,  and  EqvMity  hefon  the  law}  He  de- 
serves it  by  the  trials  he  has  undergone,  in  prison  and 
in  exila  He  deserves  it  by  the  precious  truth  he  now 
80  eloq^uently  proclaims,  of  the  Fraternity  of  Kations. 

As  I  r^ard  his  course,  I  am  filled  with  reverence  and 
awe.  I  see  in  him,  more  than  in  any  other  living  man, 
the  power  which  may  be  exerted  by  a  single,  earaest, 
honest  soul  in  a  noble  cause.  In  himself  he  is  more 
than  a  whole  cabinet,  more  than  a  whole  army.  I 
watch  him  in  Hungary,  whde,  like  Camot  in  France,  he 
"  oi^nizes  victory " ;  I  follow  him  in  exile  to  distant 
Mahometan  Turkey,  and  there  find  him,  with  only  a 
scanty  band,  in  weakness  and  confinement,  still  the 
dread  of  despots ;  I  sympathize  with  him  in  his  happy 
release ;  and  now,  as  he  comes  more  within  the  sphere 
of  immediate  observation,  amazement  fills  us  all  in  the 
contemplation  of  his  career,  while  he  proceeds  from  land 
to  land,  from  city  to  city,  and,  with  words  of  matchless 
power,  seems  at  times  the  fiery  sword  of  Freedom,  and 
then  the  trumpet  of  resurrection  to  the  Nations,  — 
"  Tuba  mirum  spai-gens  sonura."  * 

I  know  not  how  others  are  impressed  ;  but  I  call  to 
mind  no  incident  in  history,  no  event  of  peace  or  war, 
—  certainly  none  of  war,  —  more  strongly  calculated, 
better  adapted,  to  touch  and  exalt  the  imagination  and 
the  hea^t  than  his  recent  visit  to  England.  He  landed 
on  the  soutliem  coast,  not  far  from  where  William  of 
Normandy,  nearly  eight  centuries  ago,  had  landed, —  not 
far  from  where,  nineteen  centuries  ago,  JidiuS  Csesar  had 
landed  also ;  but  Wdliam  on  the  field  of  Hastings,  and 
Cjesar  in  his  adventurous  expedition,  made  no  conq^uest 


■cibyGoogIc 


6  WELCOME    TO    KOSSUTH. 

comparaMe  in  grandeur  to  that  achieved  by  the  un- 
armed and  unattended  Hunffarian.  A  multitudinoug 
people,  outnumliering  far  the  armies  of  those  earlier 
times,  was  subdued  by  hi-)  wisdom  and  eloquence  ;  and 
this  exile,  proceeding  tiom  place  to  place,  traversmg 
the  couutry,  at  last,  m  the  -very  heart  of  the  Kingdom, 
threw  down  the  gaimtlet  of  the  Eepttblic.  Without 
eq^uivoeation,  amidst  the  supporters  of  monarchy,  in 
the  shadow  of  a  lofty  thione,  he  proclaimed  himself  a 
republican,  and  protlaimed  the  republic  as  his  cherished 
aspiration  for  Hungary  And  yet,  amidst  the  excite- 
ments ot  thit  impaialleled  scene,  with  that  discretion 
■which  I  pray  may  evei  attend  him  as  a  good  angel,  — 
the  ancient  poet  aptly  tells  us  that  no  Divinity  is  absent 
where  Prudence  is  ptesent,i  —  he  forbore  all  sn^estion 
of  interference  with  the  institutions  of  the  country 
whose  guest  he  was,  recognizing  that  vital  principle  of 
self-government  by  which  every  state  chooses  for  itself 
the  institutions  and  rulers  it  prefers. 

Such  a  character,  thus  grandly  historic,  —  a  li\'ing 
Wallace,  a  hviag  Tell,  I  had  almost  said  a  livmg 
Washington,  —  deserves  our  homage.  Nor  am  I  tempt- 
ed to  ask  if  there  be  any  precedent  for  the  resolution 
now  imder  consideration.  There  is  a  time  for  all  thii^ ; 
and  the  time  has  come  for  us  to  make  a  precedent  in 
harmony  with  his  unprecedented  career.  The  occasion 
is  iit ;  the  hero  is  near  ;  let  us  speak  our  welcome.  It 
is  true,  that,  unlike  Lafayette,  he  has  never  directly 
served  our  conntry ;  but  I  cannot  admit  that  on  this  ac- 
count he  is  less  wortliy.  Like  Lafayette,  he  perilled  life 
and  all ;  like  Lafayette,  he  did  penance  in  an  Austrian 
dungeon ;  like  lafayette,  he  served  the  cause  of  Free- 


"  Nullmn  numen  abeat,  s 


■cibyGoogIc 


WELCOME  TO  KOSSDTH.  7 

dom  ;  and  whosoever  serves  this  cause,  -wheresoever  he 
may  be,  in  whatever  land,  is  entitled,  according  to  his 
■vvorlis,  to  the  gratitude  of  every  true  American, hosom, 
of  every  true  lover  of  mankind. 

The  resolution  before  ua  commends  itself  by  simplici- 
ty and  completeness.  In  this  respect  it  seems  prefera- 
ble to  that  of  the  Senator  from  Ilhnois  [Mr.  Shields]  ; 
nor  is  it  obnoxious  to  objections  urged  against  that  of 
the  Senator  from  Mississippi  [Mr.  Foote]  ;  and  I  do  not 
see  that  it  can  give  any  just  umbrage,  in  our  diplomatic 
relations,  even  to  the  sensitive  representative  of  the 
House  of  Austria.  Thov^h  we  have  the  high  authority 
of  the  President,  in  his  Message,  for  styling  our  guest 
"  Governor,"  —  a  title  which  seems  to  imply  the  de  facto 
independence  of  Hungary,  when  it  is  known  that  our 
Government  declined  to  acknowledge  it,  —  the  resolu- 
tion avoids  this  difficulty,  and  speaks  of  him  without 
title  of  any  kind,  —  simply  as  a  private  citizen.  As 
such,  it  offers  him  welcome  to  the  capital  and  to  the 
country. 

The  Comity  of  Nations  I  respect.  To  the  behests  of 
the  Law  of  Nations  I  profoundly  bow.  In  our  domestic 
affairs  aU  acts  are  brought  to  the  Constitution,  as  to  a 
touchstone ;  so  in  our  foreign  affairs  aU.  acts  are  brought 
to  the  touchstone  of  the  Law  of  Nations,— that  supreme 
law,  the  world's  collected  will,  which  overarches  the 
Grand  Commonwealth  of  Christian  States.  What  that 
forbids  I  forbear  to  do.  But  no  text  of  this  voluminous 
code,  no  commentary,  no  gloss,  can  be  found,  which  for- 
bids us  to  welcome  any  exile  of  Freedom- 
Looking  at  this  resolution  in  its  various  lights,  as 
a  carrying  out  of  the  act  of  the  last  Coi^ress,  as  justly 
due  to  the  exalted  character  of  our  guest,  and  as  proper 


■cibyGoogIc 


8  WELCOME  TO  KOSSUTH. 

ill  form  and  consistent  with  the  Law  of  Nations,  it  seems 
impossible  to  avoid  the  conclusion  in  its  favor.  On  its 
merits  it  would  naturally  be  adopted,  And  hero  I 
might  atop. 

An  appeal  is  made  against  the  resolution  on  grounds 
■which  seem  to  me  extraneous  and  irrelevant.  There  is 
an  attempt  to  involve  it  with  the  critical  question  of 
intervention  hy  our  country  in  European  affairs;  and 
recent  speeches  in  England  and  New  York  are  adduced 
to  show  that  such  hitervention  is  sought  by  our  guest. 
It  is  sufficient  to  say,  in  reply  to  this  sc^gestion,  intro- 
duced hy  tQie  Senator  from  G-eorgia  [  Mr.  Berrien]  with 
a  skill  which  all  might  envy,  and  adopted  by  the  Sena- 
tor from  New  Jersey  [Mr.  MiLLEK],  ilwi  no  such  inter- 
vention is  promised  or  implied  ly  the  resolution.  It  does 
not  appear  on  the  hce  of  the  resolution ;  it  is  not  in  any 
way  suggested  by  the  resolution,  directly  or  indirectly. 
It  can  he  found  only  in  the  imagination,  the  anxieties, 
or  the  fears  of  Senators.  It  is  a  mere  ghost,  and  not  a 
reality.  As  such  we  may  dismiss  it.  But  I  feel  strongly 
on  this  point,  and  desire  to  go  further.  Here,  again,  I 
shall  he  brief ;  for  the  occasion  allows  me  to  give  con- 
clusions only,  and  not  details. 

While  thus  warmly,  with  my  heart  in  my  hand,  join- 
ing in  this  tribute,  I  wish  to  be  understood  as  in  no  re- 
spect encouraging  any  idea  of  belhgerent  intervention  in 
European  affairs.  Such  a  system  would  have  in  it  no 
element  of  just  self-defence,  and  would  open  vials  of 
perplexities  and  ills  which  I  trust  our  country  wiU  never 
be  called  to  affront.  I  inculcate  no  frigid  isolation. 
God  forbid  that  we  should  ever  close  our  ears  to  the  cry 
of  distress,  or  cease  to  swell  with  indignation  at  the  steps 
of  tyranny !     In  the  wisdom  of  "Washir^on  we  find 


■cibyGoogIc 


WELCOME   TO   KOSSUTH.  9 

perpetual  counsel.  like  Waalungtori,  in  his  eloquent 
words  to  the  Minister  of  the  French  Directory,  I  would 
offer  sympathy  and  God-speed  to  all,  in  every  land,  who 
struggle  for  Human  Eights ;  but,  sternly  as  Washington 
on  another  occasion,  against  every  pressure,  against  all 
popular  appeals,  against  all  solicitations,  against  aU  blan- 
dishments, I  would  uphold  with  steady  hand  the  peace- 
ful neutrality  of  the  country.  Could  I  now  approach  our 
mighty  guest,  I  would  say  to  him,  with  the  respectful 
frankness  of  a  friend :  "  Be  content  with  the  oiitgushing 
sympathy  which  you  now  inspire  everywhere  throughout 
this  wide-spread  land,  and  may  it  strengthen  your  soul ! 
Trust  in  God,  in  the  inspiration  of  your  cause,  and  in 
the  Great  Future,  pregnant  with  freedom  for  all  man- 
kind. But  respect  our  ideas,  as  we  respect  yours.  Do 
not  seek  to  reverse  our  traditional,  established  policy  of 
peace.  Bo  not,  under  tlm  too  plausible  sophism  of  uphold- 
ing iwn-interveniion,  provoke  American  intervention  on 
distant  European  soU.  Leave  us  to  tread  where  Wash- 
ington points  the  way." 

And  yet,  with  these  convictions,  Mr.  President,  which 
I  now  most  sincerely  express,  I  trust  the  Senator  from 
Geoigia  [Mr.  Berrien]  will  pardon  me  when  I  say  I 
cannot  join  in  his  proposed  amendment, — and  for  this 
specific  reason.  To  an  act  of  comtesy  and  welcome  it 
attaches  a  condition,  which,  however  just  as  an  inde- 
pendent proposition,  is  most  ungracious  in  such  connec- 
tion. It  is  out  of  place,  and  everything  out  of  place  is 
to  a  certain  extent  offensive.  If  adopted,  it  would  im- 
pair, if  not  destroy,  the  value  of  our  act.  A  generous 
hospitality  will  not  make  terms  or  conditions  with  a 
guest ;  and  such  hospitality  I  trust  Congress  will  ten- 
der to  Louis  Kossuth. 


■cibyGoogIc 


OUR  COUNTRY  ON  THE  SIDE  OF  FREEDOM, 
WITHOUT  BELLIGEllENT  INTRKVENTION. 

Letter  to  a  Philadelphia  Committee,  December  23,  1851, 


■When  this  letter  was  written,  Koaautli  was  engaged  in  the  effort  fa) 
enlist  our  countiy  in  active  measures  for  the  liberation  of  liuiigary. 

"WAiSniNQTON,  December  23,  1851. 

DEAE  SIK,  —  It  is  not  in  my  power  to  unite  with 
the  citizens  of  Philadelphia  in  their  banquet  to 
Governor  Kosanth.  But  though  not  present  in  person, 
my  heart  will  be  with  them  in  every  word  of  honor  to 
that  aiustrious  man,  in  every  assurance  of  sympathy  for 
his  great  cause,  and  in  every  practical  effort  to  place 
our  country  openly  on  the  side  of  Freedom, 

Among  citizens  aU  violence  is  forbidden  by  the  Mu- 
nicipal Law,  which  is  enforced  by  no  private  arm,  but 
by  the  sheriff,  in  the  name  of  the  Government,  and  under 
the  sanctions  of  the  magistrate.  So,  among  the  Nations, 
all  violence,  and  especially  all  belligerent  intervention, 
should  be  forbidden  by  International  Law ;  and  I  trust 
the  day  is  not  far  distant  when  this  prohibition  will  be 
maintained  by  the  Federation  of  Christian  States,  with 
an  exemtive  power  too  mighty  for  any  contuniiujious  re- 
sistance. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be.  Gentlemen, 

Tour  faithful  servant, 

Charles  Sumseb. 
To  THE  Committee, 


■cibyGoogIc 


CLEMENCY  TO  POLITICAL  OFFENDEES. 


At  tlie  featival  the  following  toast  was  gireit :  ' '  Eon.  Gharlcs  Sum- 
iier:  In  tlie  Cradle  of  Liberty  the  cause  of  this  exile  will  ever  find  a 

The  following  letter  was  then  I'ead. 

Washington,  January  22,  1852. 

GENTLEMEN,—  It  is  not  in  my  power  to  unite  in 
your  festal  meeting  this  evening.  But  be  assured 
I  sliall  rejoice  in  every  word  of  affection  and  honor  for 
Ireland,  and  of  sympathy  with  all  her  children,  especial- 
ly those  patriots  who  have  striven  and  suffered  for  the 
common  good. 

In  answer  to  your  express  request,  I  beg  leave  to  in- 
close a  sentiment,  which  I  trust  may  find  a  response  at 
once  from  our  own  Government  and  from  that  of  Great 
Britain. 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  Gentlemen, 

Your  faithful  servant, 

Charles  Sumker. 

John  T.  Towers,  Esq.,  Chairman,  &c. 


■cibyGoogIc 


JUSTICE  TO  THE  LA^^D  STATES,  AND  POLICT 
OF  ROADS. 

Spkeohes  in  tee  Sknate  OS  TTiE  "lowA  Railhoad  Bill,  Januaut  27, 
February  17,  akd  Maroe  10,  1852. 


The  Senate  having  under  consideration  tlie  "bill  granting  tlie  right 
of  way,  and  making  o.  grant  of  land  to  the  State  ot  Iowa,  in  sid  of  the 
eonsU'uetion  of  certain  railroada  m  said  State,"  Mi  Sumner  entered 
into  the  debate,  spcaLmg  Beicral  times  His  remarks  were  much  no- 
ticed at  the  time  in  the  Senate,  aud  aLo  in  the  conntrj,  especiaUy  m 
the  West.  At  home  m  Massachusetts  political  opponents  seized  the 
occasion  for  criticism,  and  resolutions  on  tlie  -utgei-t  weie  introduced 
into  the  Legislature  ot  Massachusetts  He  sfoke  flist  January  27, 
1852,  as  follows. 

MR  PRESIDENT,— This  "bill  is  important  hy  itself, 
inasmuch  as  it  promises  to  secure  the  buQding  of 
a  railroad,  at  large  cost,  for  a  long  distaace,  through  a 
country  not  thickly  settled,  in  a  remote  comer  of  the 
land;  It  18  more  important  still  as  a  precedent  for  a 
series  of  similar  appropriations  in  other  States.  In  this 
discussion,  then,  we  have  hefore  ns,  at  the  same  time, 
the  special  interests  of  the  State  of  Iowa,  traversed  hy 
this  projected  road,  and  also  the  great  question  of  the 
public  lands. 

I  have  no  inclination  to  enter  into  these  matters  at 
lei^h,  even  if  I  were  ahle ;  hut  entertaining  no  doubt 
as  to  the  requirements  of  policy  and  of  justice  in  the  pres- 
ent case,  and  in  aU  like  eases,  — seeing  my  way  clearly 


■cibyGoogIc 


JUSTICE  TO  THE  LAND  STATES.  13 

before  mo  by  lights  that  cannot  deceive,  —  I  hope  in  a 
few  words  to  exhibit  these  requirements  and  to  make 
this  way  manifest  to  others.  I  am  especially  moved  to 
do  so  by  the  tone  of  remark  often  heard  out  of  the  Sen- 
ate, and  sometimes  even  here,  begrudging  these  appro- 
priations, and  charging  particular  States  for  which  they 
are  made  with  undue  absorption  of  the  national  prop- 
erty. It  is  sometimes  said  —  not  in  this  body,  I  know 
—  that  "the  West  is  stealing  the  pubhc  lands";  and 
the  Senator  from  Virginia  [Mr.  Hunter],  who  expresses 
himself  with  liankness  and  moderation  wortliy  of  re- 
gard, in  discussing  this  very  measure,  distinctly  says 
that  "  we  are  squandering  away  the  pubhc  lands  " ;  and 
he  complains  that  such  appropriations  are  partial,  "he- 
cause  very  large  amounts  of  liuid  are  distributed  to  those 
States  in  which  they  lie,  while  nothing  is  given  to  the 
old  States."  And  the  Senator  from  Kentucky  [Mr.  Un- 
derwood], taking  up  this  strain,  dwells  at  great  length, 
and  in  every  variety  o£  expression,  on  the  alleged  par- 
tiality of  the  distribution. 

Now  I  know  full  well  that  the  States  in  which  these 
lands  lie  need  no  defender  hke  myself. .  But,  as  a  Sen- 
ator from  one  of  the  old  States,  I  desire  thus  early  to 
declare  my  dissent  from  these  views,  and  the  reasons 
for  this  dissent.  Beyond  a  general  concern  that  the 
pubhc  lauds,  of  which  the  Union  is  now  almoner,  cus- 
todian, and  proprietor,  should  be  administered  freely, 
generously,  bountifully,  in  such  wise  as  most  to  pro- 
mote their  settlement,  and  to  build  upon  them  towns, 
cities,  and  States,  the  nurseries  of  ftfture  empire, — 
beyond  this  concern,  wlridi  leads  me  gladly  to  adopt  the 
proposition  in  favor  of  actual  settlers  brought  forward 
by  the  Senator  from  Wisconsin  [Mr.  Walker],  I  find 


■cibyGoogIc 


14  JUSTICI  TO  THE  LAND   STATES, 

clear  and  special  reason  for  supporting  tlie  measure  be- 
fore the  Senate  in  an  undeniable  rule  of  justice  to  the 
States  in  which  the  lands  lie. 

Let  me  speak,  then,  for  jtistice  to  the  Land  States. 
And  in  doing  so  I  wish  to  present  an  important,  and,  as 
it  seems  to  me,  decisive  consideration,  —  not  adduced 
thus  far  in  this  debate,  nor  do  I  know  that  it  has  been 
ai^ed  in  any  former  discussion,  — fowided  on  the  exemp- 
tion /ram.  te^ation  enjoyed  hy  the  natwruil  lands  in  the 
severed  States,  and  the  ung^iestionahle  value  of  this  fran- 
chise. The  subject  naturally  presents  itself  under  two 
heads :  ji/rst,  the  origin  and  nature  of  this  franchise ; 
and,  secondly,  its  extent  and  value,  after  deducting  all 
reservations  and  grants  to  the  several  States, 

I.  In  the  Jirsl  place,  as  to  the  origin  and  nature  of 
the  immunity  enjoyed  by  the  national  domain  in  the 
several  States. 

The  United  States  are  proprietors  of  large  tracts  with- 
in the  municipal  and  legislative  jurisdiction  of  States, 
not  held  directly  by  virtue  of  any  original  prerogative 
or  eminent  domain,  by  any  right  of  conquest,  occu- 
pancy, or  discovery,  but  under  acts  of  cession  from  the 
old  States,  in  which  the  lands  were  situated,  and  from 
foreign  countries,  recognized  and  confirmed  in  the  stat- 
utes by  which  the  different  States  have  been  consti- 
tuted. Words  determining  this  relation  are  found  in 
the  Ordinance  of  1787,  as  follows :  "  The  Legislatures  of 
those  districts  or  new  States  shall  never  interfere  with 
the  primary  disposal  of  the  soU  by  the  United  States  in 
Congress  assembled,  nor  with  any  regulations  Congress 
may  find  necessary  for  securing  the  title  in  such  soil  to 
the  6owa/t^e  purchasers."    This  provision  is  incorporated. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AKD  POLICTi    OF  EOADS,  15 

as  an  article  of  compact,  in  aubseq^uent  statutes  under 
which  the  new  States  took  their  pla^e  in  the  Union.  It 
18  "the  primary  disposal  of  the  soil,"  without  anyinci- 
dent  of  sovereignty,  which  is  here  oecured. 

Eegarding  the  United  States,  then,  as  simple  propri 
etors,  under  tlie  jurisdiction  of  the  States,  would  they 
not  be  liable,  in  the  discretion  of  the  States,  to  the  bur- 
dens of  other  proprietors,  unless  specially  exempted  ? 
This  exemption  is  conceded.  In  the  Ordinance  of  1787 
it  is  expressly  declared  that  "  no  tax  abaU  be  imposed 
on  lands  the  property  of  the  United  States";  and  this 
provision,  like  that  already  mentioned,  was  embodied  in 
succeeding  Acts  of  Congress  by  which  new  States  were 
constituted.  The  fact  that  it  was  formally  conceded 
and  has  been  thus  embodied  seems  to  denote  that  such 
concession  was  regarded  as  necessary  to  secure  the  de- 
sired immunity.  Indeed,  from  familiar  piznciples  of  our 
jurisprudence,  recognized  by  the  Supreme  Court,  it  is 
reasonable  to  infer,  that,  without  such  express  exemp- 
tion, this  whole  extent  of  territory  would  be  within  the 
field  of  local  t«.xation,  liable,  bke  the  lands  of  other  pro- 
prietors, to  all  customary  burdens  and  incidents. 

Thus,  in  an  early  case  of  Pennsylvania,  it  is  decided 
that  the  purchase  of  land  by  tlie  United  States  would 
not  alone  be  sufficient  to  vest  them  with  the  jurisdic- 
tion, or  to  oust  the  jurisdiction  of  the  State,  without 
being  accompanied  or  followed  by  the  consent  of  the 
L^slature  of  the  State.^  And  it  is  judicially  declared 
by'the  late  Mr.  Justice  Woodbury,  in  a  well-considered 
case : — 

""Where  the  United  States  own  land  situated  within  the 

limits  of  particular  States,  and  over  which  they  have  no 

1  See  Commonwealth  of  PennaylTiinin  v.  Young.  1  Kent's  Com.,  431. 


;db,Googlc 


16  JUSTICE   TO    THE    LAND    STATRS, 

cession  of  jurisdiction,  for  objects  either  special  or  general, 
little  doubt  exists  t}i/U  f/te  rights  and  remedies  in  relation  to 
it  are  mwaUjf  such  a$  apphj  to  otlier  land-owners  within  the 

After  setting  forth  certain  rights  of  the  United  States, 
the  learned  judge  proceeds :  — 

"All  these  rights  exist  in  the  United  States  for  constitu- 
tional purposes,  and  without  a  special  cession  of  jurisdiction  ; 
though  it  ia  admitted  that  other  powers  OTer  the  property  and 
persoiK  on  such  lands  will,  of  course,  renrnin  in  the  States, 
till  anch  a  cession  is  made.  Nothing  passes  without  such  a 
cession,  except  what  is  an  incident  to  the  title  and  purpose 
of  the  General  Government."  ' 

The  Supreme  Court  give  great  eminence  to  the  sov- 
ereign right  of  taxation  in  the  States,  saying :  — 

"  Taxation  is  a  sacred  right,  essential  to  the  existence  of 
Goyernnient, — -an  incident  of  sovereignty.  The  right  of 
legislation  is  coextensive  with  the  incident,  to  attach  it 
upon  all  pei-sons  and  property  within  the  jurisdiction  of  a 
State." " 

And  again,  the  Court  say  in  another  case  :  — 

"  However  absolute  the  right  of  an  individual  may  be,  it 
is  still  in  the  nature  of  that  right  that  it  moat  bear  a  por- 
tion of  the  public  burdens,  and  that  portion  must  be  deter- 
mined by  the  Legislature."  * 

In  the  same  case,  the  Court,  after  declaring  "  that  the 
taxing  power  is  of  vital  importance,  ^  that  it  is  essential 
to  the  existence  of  Government,  —  that  the  lelinctuish- 

1  Unitad  Siates  0.  Ames,  1  Wpodbuty  and  Miiiot,  80. 


;db,Googlc 


AND  POLICY   OF  ROADS.  17 

ment  of  such  a  power  is  never  to  be  assumed,"  add, 
cautiously,  that  they  "  will  not  say  tliat  a.  State  may  not 
relinijuish  it,  — &at  a  coTmderaiion  sufficimtly  valuable 
to  mdiux  a  partial  release  of  it  may  not  exist."  ^ 

Wliile  thus  upholding  the  right  of  taxatiou  as  one 
of  the  precious  attributes  belonging  to  the  States,  the 
Court,  under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  prop- 
erly exempt  instruments  and  means  of  government; 
but  they  hmit  the  exemption  to  these  instruments  and 
means.  Thus  it  is  expressly  decided  in  a  celebrated 
case,^  that,  while  the  Bauk  of  the  United  States,  being 
one  of  the  necessary  iyistruTiierUs  and  means  to  execute 
the  sovereign  powers  of  the  nation,  is  not  hable  to  tax- 
ation, yet  the  real  property  of  the  Bank  is  thus  liable, 
in  common  with  other  leal  property  in  a  particular 
State. 

Now  the  lands  held  by  the  United  States  do  not  be- 
long to  instruments  and  means  necessary  and  proper  to 
execute  the  sovereign  powers  of  the  nation.  In  this 
t  they  clearly  differ  from  fortifications,  arsenals, 

i  navy-yards.  They  are  strictly  in  the  nature  of  pri- 
■Bate  property  belonging  to  the  nation  and  situated  with- 
in the  jurisdiction  of  States.  In  excusing  them  from 
taxation,  our  fathers  acted  unquestionably  according  to 
the  suggestions  of  prudence,  but  also  under  the  influ- 
ence of  precedent,  derived  at  that  time  from  the  preroga- 
tives of  the  British  Crown.  It  was  ah  early  prerogative, 
transmitted  from  feudal  days,  when  all  taxes  were  in  the 
nature  of  aids  and  subsidies  to  the  monarch,  that  the 
property  of  the  Crown,  of  every  nature,  should  be  ex- 
empt from  taxation.   But  mark  tlie  change.   Tliis  ancient 


■cibyGoogIc 


18  JUSTICE   TO    THE   LAND    STATES, 

feudal  principle  is  not  now  the  law  of  England.  By 
the  statutu  of  39  and  40  Geoi^e  III.,  chap.  88,  passed 
thirteen  years  after  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  the  lands  and 
tenements  purcliasetl  by  the  Crown  out  of  the  privy 
purse  or  other  moneys  not  appropriated  to  any  public 
service,  or  which  came  to  the  King  from  his  ancestors 
or  private  persons,  ■ —  in  other  words,  lands  and  tenements 
in  the  nature  oi  prwate  property,  —  are  subjected  to  tax- 
ation even  white  they  belong  to  the  Crown, 

Thus  the  matter  stands.  Lands  belongii^  to  the  na- 
tion, wliich,  it  seems,  even  royal  prerogative  at  this  day 
in  England  cannot  save  from  taxation,  are  in  our  country, 
imder  express  provisions  of  compact,  early  established, 
exempted  from  this  burden.  Kow,  Sir,  I  make  no  com- 
plaint ;  I  do  not  surest  any  change,  nor  do  I  hint  any 
ground  of  l^al  title  in  the  States.  But  I  do  confidently 
submit,  that  in  this  peculiar,  time-honored  immunity, 
originally  claimed  by  the  nation,  and  conceded  by  the 
States  within  which  the  public  lands  lie,  there  is  ample 
ground  of  equity,  under  which  these  States  may  now 
appeal  to  the  nation  for  assistance  out  of  these  public 
lands. 

When  I  listen  to  comparisons  discrediting  these 
States  by  the  side  of  the  old  States,  when  I  hear  it 
charged  that  they  are  constant  recipients  of  the  national 
bounty,  and  when  I  catch  those  sharper  terms  of  con- 
demnation by  which  they  axe  characterized  as  "  plun- 
derers "  and  "  robbers  "  and  "  pirates,"  I  am  forced  to 
inquire  whether  the  nation  has  not  already  received 
from  these  States  something  more  than  it  has  ever  be- 
stowed, even  in  its  most  libeml  moods,  —  whether,  at 
this  moment,  the  nation  is  not  equitably  debtor  to  these 
States,  and  not  these  States  debtors  to  the  nation. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND   POLICY   OF   ROADS.  19 

II.  I  am  now  brought  to  the  second  head  of  this  in- 
quiry,—  that  ia,  the  extent  and  value  of  the  immimity 
from  taxation,  after  deducting  aU  reservations  and  grants 
to  the  several  States.  Authentic  documents  and  facts 
place  these  beyond  question. 

From  the  official  returns  of  the  Land  Office  in  Janu- 
ary, 1849,^  it  appears  that  the  areas  of  the  twelve  Land 
States  —  Ohio,  Indiana,  Illinois,  Missom-i,  Alabama,  Mis- 
sissippi, Loniaiana,  Michigan,  Arkansas,  Wisconsin,  Iowa, 
and  Florida  —  embrace  392,579,200  acres.  Califoniia 
■was  not  at  that  time  a  State  of  the  Union.  Of  this  ter- 
ritory, only  289,961,954  acres  had  been,  in  pursuance  of 
the  laws  of  the  United  States,  surveyed,  proclaimed,  and 
put  into  the  market.  In  some  of  the  recent  States, 
more  than  a  moiety  of  the  whole  domain  had  never 
been  broi^ht  into  this  condition.  At  the  date  of  these 
official  returns  it  continued  still  unconscious  of  the 
surveyor's  chain.  Thus,  in  Wisconsin,  out  of  more 
than  thirty-four  millions  of  acres,  only  a  little  more 
than  tliirteen  millions  were  proclaimed  for  sale ;  and  in 
Iowa,  the  very  State  whose  interests  are  novif  particu- 
larly in  question,  out  of  more  than  thirty-two  millions 
of  acres,  only  a  httle  more  than  twelve  millions  were 
proclaimed  for  sale.  I  cannot  doubt  that  in  fact  the 
aggregate  of  the  public  lands  within  the  States  at  all 
times  much  exceeds  the  amount  actually  in  the  market ; 
but  since  it  may  be  said  that  lands  not  yet  surveyed, 
proclaimed,  and  put  into  the  market,  though  nominally 
under  the  jurisdiction  of  the  State,  must  lie  actually 
beyond  the  sphere  of  its  influence,  so  as  not  to  derive 
any  appreciable  advantage  from  the  local  government, 
and  as  I  desire  to  hold  this  ai^unent  above  every  im- 
»  Exec  Doc,  aotli  Cong,  Sd  Sess.,  H.  E.  No.  12,  Table  fl,  p.  25B. 


■cibyGoogIc 


20  JUSTICE    TO   THE    LAND    STATES, 

putation  of  exaggeration,  —  knowing  full  well  that  it 
can  afford  to  be  imderatated, —  I  forbear  to  take  the 
larger  amount  as  basis,  but  found  my  estimates  upon 
the  extent  of  territory  actually  proclaimed  for  aale,  from 
the  beginning  down  to  January,  1849,  amounting  to 
289,961,954  acres. 

All  these  lands  thus  proclaimed  have  been  exempt 
from  taxation.  But  since  they  were  proclaimed  at  differ- 
ent periods,  and  also  sold  at  different  periods,  so  far  as 
they  are  sold,  it  is  necessary,  in  arriving  at  the  value  of 
this  immunity,  to  ascertain  what  is  the  average  period 
during  which  the  lands,  after  being  put  into  the  market, 
are  in  the  possession  of  the  United  States.  Tliis  we  are 
able  to  do  from  official  returns  of  the  Land  Office.  Here 
is  a  table  now  before  me,  from  which  it  appears,  that, 
of  the  lands  offered  for  sale  during  a  period  of  thirty 
years,  large  quantities  were,  at  the  expiration  of  the 
period,  still  on  hand.  Of  the  fourteen  millions  offered 
in  Ohio  during  this  period,  more  than  two  millions  re- 
mained, while,  of  the  nineteen  millions  otfered  in  Mis- 
souri, more  than  twelve  milhons  remained.  Of  all  the 
lands  offered  during  this  period  of  tMrty  years,  more 
than  half  were  still  unsold.^  And  out  of  the .  aggregate 
of  289,961,954  acres  pTOclaimed  from  the  beginning 
down  to  January,  1849,  notwithstanding  the  advancing 
tread  of  our  thick-coming  population,  only  100,209,656 
acres  had  been  sold.*  Now,  without  further  pursuing 
these  details,  I  assume,  what  cannot  be  cLuestioned,  as  it 
is  most  clearly  within  the  truth,  that  lands  proclaimed 
are  not  aU  sold  till  after  a  period  of  fifty  years.  Tliis 
estimate  makes  the  average  period  during  which  the 
la,  Table  a,  p.  310. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND    POLICY   OF   EOADS.  21 

lands,  after  being  siirveyed  and  proclaimed,  are  actually 
in  the  possession  of  the  United  States,  and  free  from 
taxation,  twenty-five  yeai's. 

According  to  this  estimate,  289,961,954  acres,  pro- 
claimed for  sale,  have  been  absolutely  free  from  taxation 
during  the  space  of  twenty-five  years ;  and  yet,  during 
this  whole  period,  they  have,  without  the  oi-dinary  con- 
sideration, enjoyed  the  protection  of  the  State,  with  ad- 
vantages and  increased  value  from  highways,  bridges, 
and  school-houses,  aU  of  which  are  supported  by  the 
adjoining  proprietors,  under  the  laws  of  the  State,  with- 
out assistance  of  any  kind  from  tlie  United  States, 

Such  is  the  extent  of  this  immunity.  But,  in  order 
to  determine  its  precise  value,  it  is  necessary  to  advance 
a  step  farther,  and  ascertain  one  other  element :  that  is, 
the  averse  annual  tax  on  land  in  these  States, — for  in- 
stance, on  the  land  of  other  non-residents.  There  are  no 
official  documents  within  my  knowledge  by  wliich  this 
can  be  determined.  But,  after  incLuiry  of  gentlemen, 
themselves  landholders  in  these  States,  I  have  thought 
it  might  be  placed,  without  risk  of  contradiction,  at  one 
cent  an  acre.  Probably  it  is  rather  two,  or  even  three 
cents ;  but,  desiring  to  keep  within  bounds,  I  call  it  only 
one  cent  an  acre.  The  annual  tax  on  289,961,954  acres, 
at  the  rate  of  one  cent  an  acre,  would  be  1 2,899,619, 
and  the  sum-total  of  this  tax  for  twenty-five  years 
would  amount  to  $  72,490,475,  being  the  apparent  value 
of  this  immunity  from  taxation  already  enjoyed  by  the 
United  States ;  or,  if  we  call  the  annual  tax  two  cents 
an  acre,  instead  of  one  cent,  we  have  nothing  less  than 
$144,980,950,  of  which  the  United  States  may  now  be 
regarded  as  trustees  in  e^iuity  for  the  benefit  of  the  Land 


■cibyGoogIc 


22  JUSTICE   TO    THE   LAJS'D    STATES, 

Against  this  large  sain  I  may  'be  lemiiided  of  leserva- 
tions  and  grants  hy  the  nation  to  the  different  States. 
These,  when  examined,  do  not  materially  interfere  with 
the  result.  From  the  oificial  tetui-ua  of  the  Land  Office, 
January,  1849,*  we  learn  tlie  precise  extent  of  these  res- 
ervations and  grants  down  to  tliat  period.  Here  is  the 
exhibit  i  -— 

Common  Schools 10,807,958 

Universities 823,950 

Seat  of  Government '  50,860 

Salines  ..........    422,325 

Deafand  Dumb  Asylums  .....  45,440 

Internal  Improyements  .....         .  8,474,473 

20,625,000 

This  is  all.  In  the  whole  aggregate  only  a  little  more 
than  twenty  millions  of  acres  have  been  granted  to  these 
States.  The  value  of  this  sum-total,  if  deducted  from 
the  estimated  value  of  the  franchise  enjoyed  by  the 
nation,  will  stiU  leave  a  very  lai^e  balance  to  the  credit 
of  the  Land  States.  Estimating  the  land  at  $  1.25  an 
acre,  all  the  reservations  and  grants  wiU  amount  to  no 
more  than  $25,781,257.  Deducting  this  sum  from 
$72,490,475,  we  have  $46,709,218  to  the  credit  of  the 
Land  States ;  or,  if  we  place  the  tax  at  two  cents  an  acre, 
more  than  double  this  sum. 

This  resiilt  leaves  tlie  nation  so  lai^ely  in  debt  to  the 
Land  States  that  it  becomes  of  small  importance  to  scan 
closely  the  character  of  these  grants  and  lesei^ationg  to 
determine  whether  in  lai^e  part  tliey  tire  not  Uieady 
satisfied  by  specific  considerations  on  the  part  of  the 
States.     But  the  stress,  which,  m  the  ccur=(e  of  this  de 

1  Exec.  Doc,  30t1i  Cong,  ^d  Ssa.,  H.  R  Sti  12  Table  10  p  SBO 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND    POLICY    OF   EOAHR.  23 

bate,  is  laid  upon  tliia  bounty,  leads  me  to  go  further. 
From  an  examination  of  the  Acts  of  Congress  by  which 
the  Land  States  were  admitted  into  the  Union  it  appears 
that  a  large  portion  of  these  reservations  and  grants 
was  made  on  the  express  condition  that  the  lands  sold 
by  the  United  States,  under  the  jurisdiction  of  the 
States,  shoidd  remain  exem;pt  from  any  Siate  tax  for  the 
space  of  fvoe  years  after  the  sale.  This  condition  is  par- 
ticularly applicable  to  the  appropriations  for  common 
schools,  imiversities,  seats  of  government,  and  salines, 
amounting  to  12,105,093  acres.  It  is  also  pai-ticularly 
applicable  to  another  item^  not  mentioned  before,  which 
is  known  as  the  five  per  cent  fund,  from  the  proceeds 
of  the  public  lands,  for  the  benefit  of  roads  and  canals, 
amounting  in  the  whole  to  1 5,242,069.  These  appro- 
priations, being  made  on  specific  conditions,  faithfully 
performed  by  the  States  down  to  this  day,  are  properly 
excluded  from  our  calculations.  And  this  is  an  answer 
to  the  Senator  from  Kentucky  [Mr.  Underwood],  who 
dwelt  so  energetically  on  these  appropriations,  without 
seeming  to  be  aware  of  the  conditions  on  which  they 


That  I  may  make  this  more  intelligible,  let  me  refer 
to  the  act  for  the  admission  of  Indiana.  After  setting 
forth  the  five  reservations  and  grants  already  mentioned, 
it  proceeds :  — 

"  And  provided  always,  That  the  five  foregoing  provisions 
herein  offered  are  on  the  conditions  that  the  convention  of 
the  said  State  shall  provide  by  an  ordinance,  irrevocable 
without  the  consent  of  the  Unitecl  States,  that  every  and 
■each  tract  of  land  sold  by  the  United  States,  from  and  after 
the  first  day  of  December  nest,  shall  be  and  remain  exempt 
from  any  tax  laid  by  order  or  under  auy  authority  of  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


24  JUSTICE   TO  THE   LAND    STATRS, 

State,  whetlier  for  State,  county,  or  township,  or  any  othef 
purpose  whatever,  for  the  term  of  five  years  from  and  after 
the  day  of  sale." 

This  clause  does  not  stand  by  itself  in  the  acts  ad- 
mitting the  more  recent  States,  but  is  mixed  with  other 
conditions.  I  will  not  believe,  however,  that  any  dia- 
crimination  can  be  made  between  particular  Land  States, 
on  the  ground  of  difference  in  conditions  properly  at- 
tributable to  accidental  circumstances.  The  provision 
jnat  cLnoted  is  found  substantially  in  the  acts  for  the 
admission  of  Ohio,  Missouri,  Illinois,  Alabama,  Missis- 
sippi, and  Arkansas,  So  far  as  these  States  are  con- 
cerned, it  is  a  complete  consideration,  in  the  nature  of 
satisfaction,  for  reservations  and  grants  enjoyed  by  them. 
It  also  helps  to  illustrate  tlie  value  of  the  permawnt 
immimity  from  taxation  belonging  to  the  United  States, 
by  exhibiting  concessions  made  by  the  United  States  to 
assure  this  franchise  for  certain  moderate  c[uantitie3  of 
land  during  the  brief  space  of  live  yeara  only. 

After  the  constant  chaises  of  scLiiandering  the  public 
lands  and  of  partiality  to  the  Land  States,  I  think  all 
will  be  astonished  at  the  small  amount  on  the  debtor 
aide,  in  the  great  account  between  the  States  and  the 
Nation.  This  consists  of  grants  for  internal  improve- 
ments, in  the  whole  reaching  to  only  8,474,473  acres, 
which,  at  $L25  an  acre,  will  be  $10,593,091.  If  this 
sum  be  deducted  from  the  estimated  value  of  the  immu- 
nity already  enjoyed  by  the  United  Stat-es,  we  shall  atdl 
have  upimrds  of  860,000,000  surrendered  hy  the  Laitd 
States  to  ilie  nation ;  or,  if  we  caU  the  annual  tax  two 
cents  an  acre,  more  than  double  this  sum. 

In  these  estimates  I  group  together  all  the  Land 
States.     But,  taking  separate  States,  we  find  the  same 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND    POLICY    OF   EOADS.  25 

proportionate  result.  For  instance,  tliere  is  OMo,  with 
16,770,984  acres  proclaimed  for  sale  down  to  January 
1, 1849,  Adopting  the  basis  already  employed,  and  as- 
suming that  these  lands  continued  in  the  possession 
of  the  United  States  an  avei-age  period  of  twenty-five 
years  after  being  surveyed  and  proclaimed,  and  that 
the  land  tax  was  one  cent  an  acre,  we  liave  84,192,746 
as  the  value  of  the  immunity  from  taxation  already 
enjoyed  by  the  United  States  in  Ohio.  From  this  may 
be  deducted  the  value  of  1,181,134  acres,  being  grants 
to  this  State  for  internal  improvements,  at  $1.25  per 
afire,  equal  to  $  1,476,417,  leaving  upwards  of  two  mil- 
lions—  nearly  three  millions  — of  dollars  yielded  by 
this  '^t.t    t     th     nation. 

T  1  th       State,  —  Missouri.     It  appears   that 

down  t  J  ay  1849,  39,635,609  acres  had  been  pro- 
claim d  f  al  n  this  State.  Assuming  again  the 
has  1  ady  ployed,  we  have  $9,908,902  as  the 
value  of  the  imn  mity  from  taxation  already  enjoyed 
by  the  United  States  in  Missouri.  From  this  may  be 
deducted  the  value  of  500,000  acres,  granted  for  inter- 
nal improvements,  which,  at  $  1.25  an  acre,  amounts  to 
$  625,000,  leaving  upwards  of  nine  millions  of  dollars 
thus  yielded  by  this  State  to  the  nation. 

In  this  way  I  might  proceed  with  ah.  tlie  Land  States 
individually ;  but  enough  is  done  to  repel  the  charges 
against  them,  and  to  elucidate  a  peculiar  eqtiiiy.  On 
the  one  side,  they  have  received  httle,  very  little,  from 
the  nation,  —  while,  on  the  other  side,  the  nation,  by 
strong  considerations  of  eq^uity,  is  largely  indebted  to 
them.  This  obligation  of  itself  constitutes  an  ecLuita- 
ble  fund,  to  which  the  Land  States  may  properly  resort 
for  assistance  in  works  of  internal  improvement ;  and 


■cibyGoogIc 


26  JUSTICE   TO   THE    LAXD    STATES, 

Congress  "will  show  an  indifference  to  reasonable  de- 
mands, should  it  fail  to  deal  with  them  muniiicently, 
— in  some  sort,  according  to  the  simple  measure  of  ad- 
vantage which  the  nation  has  already  so  largely  enjoyed 
at  their  hands. 

Against  these  clear  and  well-supported  merits,  the 
old  States  present  small  claims  to  consideration.  They 
have  waived  no  right  of  taxation  over  lands  within  their 
acknowledged  jurisdiction ;  they  have  made  no  valuahle 
concession,  they  have  yielded  up  no  costly  franchise. 
It  remams,  then,  that,  with  candor  and  justice,  they 
should  lecf^nize  the  luperior  —  I  will  not  say  exclu- 
sive—  claims  of  the  'states  within  whose  horders  and 
nnder  the  jiotectiou  nf  whose  laws  the  national  do- 
main IS  found 

Thu8  much  foi  -what  I  have  to  say  in  favor  of  this 
hill  on  the  ground  of  justice  to  the  States  in  which  the 
lands  lip  If  this  ai^ument  did  not  seem  sufficiently 
conclu3i>  e  to  rendei  my  further  discussion  superfluous, 
at  lei%t  fiom  me  I  mi^ht  go  forward,  and  show  that  the 
true  interebts  of  the  whole  country —  of  every  State  in 
the  Union  i"-  ct  Iowa  itself  —  are  happily  coincident 
■vvith  this  claim  of  justice. 

The  State  of  low  a  though  distant  and  still  sparsely 
settled,  la  known  to  contain  the  materials  of  boundless 
prosperity.  The  northern  part  may  wear  some  of  the 
rigid  features  of  New  England,  but  the  middle  and 
southern  portion  has  a  surface  of  great  fertility,  and  in 
its  bosom  coal  to  an  incalculable  amount,  —  more,  it  is 
supposed,  than  all  to  he  found  in  Ei^land  and  the  whole 
European  Continent.  With  these  remarkable  capacities, 
which,  however,  it  shares  with  Illinois  and  Indiana  and 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND    POLICY   OF   ROADS,  27 

with  the  norlliem  part  of  Missouri,  it  will  he  ahle  to 
subsist  a  large  population  and  to  support  manufactories 
on  the  moat  extensive  scale.  Its  fields  ■will  naturally 
wave  with  golden  harvests,  while  its  inexhaustible  stores 
of  coal  will  quicken  every  form  of  human  industry,  and 
will  furiuah  an  incalculable  motive-power  to  all  its  mul- 
tiplying machinery  and  workshops.  If  in  the  reports 
of  Science,  now  aiithenticated  by  a  careful  and  admira- 
ble geological  survey  of  this  region,^  we  may  read  the 
future  development,  I  had  almost  said  tlie  destiny,  of 
States,  according  to  natural  laws,  wliich  I  beheve,  then 
it  would  he  difficult  to  exaggerate  what  we  may  expect 
from  Iowa. 

But  all  resources  will  be  vain  and  valueless  with- 
out humsui  intelligence,  skill,  and  exertion.  These  wiK 
change  the  face  of  the  countiy,  opening  forests,  plough- 
ing fields,  working  mines,  building  roads,  establishing 
schools,  planting  churches,  administering  justice.  To 
carry  such  blessings  into  every  part  of  this  new  region 
is  now  an  especial  duty.  Of  course  all  who  have  prop- 
erty in  this  State,  particularly  aU  landliolders,  accord- 
ing t-o  their  means,  must  contribute  to  the  improvements 
and  institutions  by  which  its  welfare  is  advanced.  This 
general  principle  seems  to  be  clear.  It  is  only  when 
we  come  to  its  application  that  there  can  be  any  ques- 
tion. 

It  will  he  observed  that  here  is  no  suggestion  of  legal 
right  on  the  part  of  the  Land  States,  or  of  legal  obliga- 
tion on  the  part  of  the  nation.     Jfor  is  there  any  sug- 

I  Report  of  a  Geological  Survey  of  Wisconsin,  lowfl,  and  Minnesota,  und 
inoidentnlly  of  a  Portion  of  Nebraska.  Territory,  miide  under  Instructions 
ftom  the  United  States  Trensury  Department,  by  David  Dale  Owsn,  United 
States  Geologisb    Philadelphia,  1E53. 


■cibyGoogIc 


28  JUSTICE  TO   THE    LAND    STATES, 

gestion  that  our  fathers,  when  by  formal  compact  tliey 
placed  this  immunity  beyond  question,  failed  to  act 
justly ;  nor  again  is  there  any  sv^estion  that  this  im- 
munity should  be  repealed.  It  is  simply  assumed  as 
an  existing  fact,  wliich  has  been  of  value  to  the  nation, 
and  therefore  constitutes  an  equitable  ground  of  obli- 
gation on  the  part  of  the  nation  in  favor  of  the  Land 
States.  Lord  Bacon  defines  equity  as  the  "  general  con- 
science of  the  realm";  and  it  is  to  this  "general  con- 
science" of  the  repiiblic  that  the  parties  interested  in 
this  obligation  must  look  for  its  recc^ition. 

And  now  the  question  is  directly  presented,  whether 
the  Great  Landholder,  persevering  in  this  system,  will 
leave  to  the  smalt  landholdera  by  his  side  the  further 
labor  of  buildii^  raiboads,  by  -which  his  own  magnificent 
domain  will  be  largely  enhanced,  without  contribution 
thereto.  The  very  statement  of  the  question  seems  to 
be  sufficient.  Reason  declares,  with  unhesitating  voice, 
that,  whatever  may  be  the  legal  immunities  of  the  Great 
Landholder,  he  cannot,  in  equity,  be  above  his  neigh- 
bors, and  that  he  should  contribute  to  these  works  in 
some  proportion  according  to  the  extent  of  the  benefit 
and  the  immunities  enjoyed.  To  ascertain  this  propor- 
tion precisely  may  be  difficult;  but  the  obligation  is 
clear  and  obvious. 

It  is  on  the  ground  of  this  obligation  that  the  bill 
now  before  the  Senate  is  most  strongly  commended.  It 
is  said,  I  know,  tliat  by  the  grant  of  alternate  sections 
for  the  purpose  of  railroads  the  remaining  sections  are 
so  far  enhanced  in  value  that  the  nation  loses  nothing 
by  the  grant,  —  so  that  it  may  enjoy  the  rare  privilege  of 
bestowing  without  losing,  of  squandering,  if  you  please, 
without   any  diminution  of  its   means.     Though  this 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND    POLICY    OF    KOADS.  29 

consideration  J5  not  unimportant,  yet  I  do  not  dwell 
upon  it, .  because  it  is  so  entirely  subordinate  to  that 
derived  from  the  positive  obligation  of  the  Great  Land- 
holder on  unanswerable  grounds  of  justice.  I  say  con- 
fidently on  unanswerable  grounds  of  justice,  because 
nothing  can  render  the  rules  of  justice  in  such  a  case 
less  obligatory  upon  the  Government  than  upon  a  pri- 
vate individual.  If  the  latter,  according  to  all  the  laws 
of  good  neighborhood,  would  be  bound  to  help  such  a 
work,  then  is  the  Government  bound.  To  decline  this 
duty,  to  shirk  this  obvious  obKgation,  is  to  behave  as  no 
private  citizen  could  behave  without  the  imputation  of 
meanness.  Thus  strongly  may  I  put  the  case,  without 
fear  of  contradiction. 

The  influence  of  roads  and  canals  in  enliancing  the 
value  of  the  public  domain  throi^h  which  they  pass 
is  well  illustrated  by  experience.  Take  the  Illinois  and 
Michigan  Canal,  for  which  alternate  sections  of  land 
were  granted  by  the  United  States.  Many  years  ago, 
as  I  understand,  aU  the  reserved  sections  on  this  line 
were  sold,  while  in  other  districts  of  Illinois,  where 
there  has  been  no  similar  improvement,  large  quanti- 
ties of  land  still  continue  misold.  Indeed,  of  the  whole 
national  domain  in  Illinois,  amoimting  to  upwards  of 
thirty-five  millions  of  acres,  only  fifteen  millions  had 
been  sold  in  January,  1849.^ 

Take  another  instance.  The  Chicago  and  Eock  Isl- 
and Eailroad  — of  which  one  of  the  proposed  roads  in 
Iowa  will  be  an  extension  —  has  given  an  impulse  to 
sales  throughout  a  wide  region.  The  Comity  of  Henry, 
through  which  it  passes,  is  one  of  the  largest  and  least 
populous  in  Illinois.      In  this  county  the  lands  had 

»  Exec.  Doc,  30th  Cong.  2rl  Sess.,  H.  K.  No.  13,  Table  6,  p.  365. 


■cibyGoogIc 


30  JUSTICE   TO   THE   LAND    STATES, 

been  in  tlie  market  for  nearly  thirty  years,  and  recent 
sales  had  not  reached  a  thousand  acres  a  year.  But 
in  the  very  year  after  this  road  was  surveyed  fifty  fJiou- 
sand  acres  of  public  land  were  sold  in  this  county,  being 
more  than  all  the  land  sold  in  the  remainder  of  the 
district.  Again,  I  am  told,  that,  after  the  bill  now  pend- 
ing passed  the  Senate,  at  the  last  Congress,  public  at- 
tention, in  anticipation  of  the  promised  improvement, 
was  attracted  to  the  neighborhood  of  Davenport,  the 
eastern  terminus  of  the  proposed  road,  and  the  public 
domain,  not  only  at  this  place,  but  in  the  adjoining 
counties,  at  once  found  a  market.  Though  the  sales 
had  already  been  considerable,  they  were  in  a  single 
year  more  than  doubled,  amountii^  to  upwards  of  eighty 
thousand  acres. 

It  will  readily  occur  to  all  that  the  whole  countiy 
must  gain  by  the  increased  value  of  the  lands  still  re- 
tained and  benefited  by  the  proposed  road.  But  this 
advantage,  though  not  unimportant,  is  trivial  by  the 
aide  of  the  grander  gains,  commercial,  political,  social, 
and  moral,  which  must  accrue  from  the  opening  of  a 
new  communication,  by  which  the  territory  beyond  the 
Mississippi  is  brought  into  connection  with  the  Atlantic 
seaboard,  and  the  distant  post  of  Council  Bluffs  becomes 
a  suburb  of  Washington.  It  would  be  difficult  to  ex^- 
gerate  the  influence  of  roatls  as  means  of  civilization. 
This,  at  least,  may  be  said :  Wliere  roads  are  not,  civili- 
zation cannot  be ;  and  civilization  advances  as  roads  are 
extended.  By  roads  rehgion  and  knowledge  are  dif- 
fused,— intercourse  of  all  kinds  is  promoted, — producer, 
manufacturer,  and  consumer  are  all  brought  nearer  to- 
gether,-— commerce  is  quickened, — markets  are  created, 
—  property,  wherever  touched  by  these  lines,  as  by  a 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND    POLICY.  OF   ROADS.  31 

magic  rod,  is  cbanged  into  new  values,  —  and  the  great 
current  of  travel,  like  that  stream  of  classic  fable,  or 
one  of  the  rivers  in  our  own  California,  hurries  in  a 
channel  of  golden  sand.  The  roads,  together  with  the 
laws,  of  ancient  lionie  are  now  hetter  remembered  than 
her  victories.  The  Flamiuian  and  Appian  Ways,  once 
trod  by  siich  great  destinies,  stni  remain  as  beneficent 
representatives  of  ancient  grandeur.  Under  God,  the 
road  and  the  schoolmaster  are  two  chief  t^ents  of  hu- 
man improvement  The  education  hegun  hy  the  school- 
master is  expanded,  liberalized,  and  completed  by  inter- 
course with  tlie  world ;  and  this  intercourse  jinds  new 
opportunities  and  inducements  in  every  road  that  ia 
built. 

Our  country  has  already  been  active  in  this  work. 
Through  a  remarkable  line  of  steam  communications, 
chiefly  by  railroad,  its  whole  population  is  now,  or  will 
be  shortly,  brought  close  to  the  borders  of  Iowa.  Cities 
of  the  Southern  seaboard,  Charleston,  Savannah,  and 
Mobile,  are  already  stretching  their  lines  in  this  direc- 
tion, soon  to  be  completed  conductors, — while  the  trav- 
eller from  aU-  tlie  principal  points  of  the  Northern  sea- 
board, from  Portland,  Boston,  Providence,  New  York, 
Philadelphia,  Baltimore,  and  Washington,  now  passes 
without  impediment  to  this  remote  region,  traversing 
a  territory  of  miexampled  resources,  at  once  magazine 
and  granary,  the  largest  coal-field  and  at  the  same 
time  the  largest  corn-field  of  the  known  globe,  wind- 
ing his  way  among  churches  and  school-houses,  among 
forests  and  gardens,  by  villages,  towns,  and  cities,  along 
the  sea,  along  rivers  and  lakes,  with  a  speed  which 
may  recall  the  gallop  of  the  ghostly  horseman  in  the 
ballad:— 


■cibyGoogIc 


JUSTICE   TO    THE   LAND    STATES, 

"  Fled  ptiEt  oil  right  aud  left  how  fost 

Each  forest,  grave,  and  bower! 

On  right  and  left  fled  past  how  &3t 

Eitoli  city,  town,  and  towerl 


On  tlie  'banks  of  the  Mississippi  he  is  now  arrested.  The 
proposed  voad  in  Iowa  will  bear  tlie  adventurer  yet  fiu-- 
ther,  to  the  banks  of  the  Missouri ;  and  this  remote 
giant  stream,  mightiest  of  tlie  earth,  leaping  from  its 
sources  in  the  Kocky  Mountains,  will  be  clasped  with 
the  Atlantic  in  the  same  u'on  bracelet.  In  all  this  I  see 
not  only  further  opportunities  for  commerce,  but  a  new 
extension  to  civdization  and  increased  strength  to  our 
National  Union. 

A  heathen  poet,  while  picturing  the  Golden  Age,  per- 
versely indicates  the  absence  of  long  roads  as  credit- 
able to  that  imaginary  period  in  contrast  with  his  own 
"How  well,"  exclaims  the  youthful  Tibullns,  "they 
lived  while  Saturn  ruled,  —  before  the  earth  was  opened 
hy  long  ways ! " 


But  the  true  Golden  Age  is  before,  not  behind ;  and  one 
of  its  tokens  will  be  the  opening  of  those  long  ways,  by 
which  villages,  towns,  counties,  states,  provinces,  nations, 
are  all  to  be  associated  and  knit  together  in  a  fellowship 
that  can  never  be  broken 

I  Eleg.  Lib.  I.  iil.  36,  S6. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND    POLICY    OF    KOADS. 


SECOND   SPEECH. 


The  debate  on  the  Iowa  Railroad  Bill  was  t  itiniel  un  s  essi' 
days  down  U>  February  17th,  when  tbe  speech  of  Mi  Sm  me  w  is  pa 
ticnlarly  assailed  by  Mr.  Hvmteiv  of  Virginia,     To  tlua  he  rej  lied  ; 


OxE  -word,  if  you  please,  Mr.  President  The  Sen- 
ator from  Virginia  [Mr.  Hunter],  who  his  just  tikeii 
liis  seat,  has  very  kindly  given  me  notice  that  I  am 
to  expect  "  a  broadside  "  from  tbe  Senator  from  Ken- 
tucky [Mr,  Underwood].  For  this  information  I  am 
properly  grateful.  When,  a  few  days  ago,  I  undertook 
to  discuss  an  important  question  in  this  body,  I  ex- 
pi-esaed  certain  views,  deemed  by  me  of  weight.  Those 
views  I  submitted  to  the  candor  and  judgment  of  the 
Senate.  I  felt  confidence  in  their  essential  justice,  ancl 
nothing  heard  since  has  impaired  tliat  confidence.  I 
have  listened  with  respect  and  attention  to  the  address 
of  the  Senator  from  Virginia,  as  it  becomes  me  to  listen 
to  everytliing  any  Senator  undertakes  to  put  forth  here. 
But  I  hope  to  be  excused,  if  I  say,  that,  in  aU  he  has  so 
eloquently  uttered  with  reference  to  myself,  he  has  not 
touched  by  a  hair-breadth  my  aigument.  He  has  criti- 
cized — ■  I  am  nnwilhng  to  say  tliat  he  lias  cavilled  at  — 
my  calculations  ;  but  he  has  not,  by  tlie  ninth  part  of  a 
hair,  touched  the  conclusion  which  I  drew.  Tliat  still 
stands.  And  let  me  say  that  it  cannot  be  successfully 
assailed  in  the  way  attempted  by  him. 

I  said  that  injustice  is  done  to  the  Land  States,  out  of 
this  body  and  in  this  body ;  out  of  this  body,  because 
I  often  hear  them  called  "  land-atealers "  and  "  land 
pirates " ;  in  this  body  by  the  Senator  from  Virginia, 


■cibyGoogIc 


34  JUSTICE    TO    THE   LAND    STATES, 

when  he  complains  of  the  partial  distribution  of  the 
public  lands,  and  particularly  points  out  the  bill  now 
before  tlie  Senate  as  an  instance.  I  said  that  this 
chaise  was  without  foundation.  Why  ?  On  what 
ground  ?  Because  tliere  is  an  existing  equity  (I  so  called 
it,  —  nothing  more)  on  the  part  of  the  Land  States  as 
against  the  General  Government.  And  on  wliat  is  this 
founded  ?  On  a  fact  of  record  in  tlie  public  acts  of  tliis 
country,  —  that  is,  the  exemption  of  the  public  domain 
from  taxation  by  tlie  States  in  which  it  is  situated. 
The  Senator  from  Virginia  does  not  question  this  fact ; 
of  course  he  cannot,  for  it  is  embodied  in  Acts  of  Con- 
gress. 

The  next  inquiry,  then,  was,  as  to  the  value  of  this 
immunity,  which  I  called  an  equity.  To  illustrate  this 
value,  I  went  into  calculations  and  estimates,  which  I 
presented,  after  some  study  of  the  subject,  —  not,  per- 
haps, such  study  as  the  Senator  from  Virginia  has  found 
time  to  give,  or  such  as  the  Senator  from  Kentucky,  in 
the  plenitude  of  his  researches,  doubtless  has  given. 
On  those  calculations  and  estimates  I  attributed  a  cer- 
tain value  to  the  equity  in  question.  My  calculations 
and  estimates  may  be  overstated ;  they  may  be  exag- 
gerated. The  Senator  from  Virginia  thinks  them-  so. 
Other  gentlemen  with  whom  I  have  had  the  privilege 
of  conversing  think  them  understated.  However  this 
may  he,  it  does  not  touch  the  argument.  I  may  have 
done  injustice  to  my  ai^ument  by  overstating  them. 
I  intended  to  understate  them.  From  all  that  I  hear, 
I  still  think  that  I  have  understated  them.  But, 
whether  understated  or  overstated,  the  ai'gument  still 
stands,  that  these  States  have  conceded  to  the  General 
Government  an   immunity  from  taxation,  —  that  this 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND   POLICY  OF  llOADS.  35 

jiBinunity  has  a  certain  valKe,  I  tliiiik  very  large,  — 
and  that  this  value  constitutes  an  equity  to  which  the 
Land  States  have  a  right  to  appeal  for  boimtiful,  ay,  for 
munificent  treatment.  Has  the  Senator  from  Virginia 
answered  this  argument  ?     Can  he  answer  it  ? 

I  forbear  to  go  into  the  subject  at  tliis  time.  I 
rose  simply  to  state,  that,  as  the  Senator  from  Vir- 
ginia generously  w'arns  me  that  I  am  to  expect  "  a 
broadside"  irom  the  Senator  from  Kentucky,  I  am 
to  regard  what  he  said  to-day,  so  far  as  I  am  con- 
cerned, simply  as  a  signal  gun.  The  Senator  will  par- 
don me,  if  I  say  it  is  nothing  more ;  for  it  lias  not 
reaehed  me,  or  my  argument.  Meanwhile  I  await, 
with  resignation,  and  without  anxiety,  the  "broadside" 
from  Kentuclcy. 


THIItD    SPEECH. 

The  debate  was  continued  for  many  days,  daring  which  the  epeecli 
of  Mr,  Sumner  was  attacked,  and  defended.  Finally,  on  the  16tii  of 
March,  immediately  before  the  qneation  was  taken,  ha  again  retumad 
to  the  subject. 

Mr.  President, —  Much  time  has  been  consumed  by 
this  question.  At  several  periods  the  debate  has  seemed 
about  to  stop,  and  then  again  it  has  taken  a  new  spring, 
while  the  goal  constantly  receded.  I  know  not  if  it  is 
now  near  the  end.  But  I  hope  that  I  shall  not  seem  to 
interfere  with  its  natural  course,  or  unduly  occupy  the 
time  of  the  Senate,  if  I  venture  again  for  one  moment 
to  take  part  in  it. 


■cibyGoogIc 


36  JUSTICE   TO   THE    LAND    STATES, 

Tlie  argument  which  I  suhmitted  on  a  former  occasioD 
has  not  passed  unregarded.  And  since  it  can  owe  little 
to  my  individual  position,  I  accept  the  opposition  it  en- 
counters as  a  tribute  to  its  intrinsic  importance.  It  has 
heen  assailed  by  different  Senators,  on  different  days, 
L  different  ways.  It  has  been  met  by  harmless 
-,  and  by  eq^ually  harmless  vituperation,  —  by 
figures  of  arithmetic  and  figures  of  rhetoric,  —  by  minute 
criticism  and  extended  discussion,  —  also,  by  that  sore 
resource  of  a  weak  cause,  hard  words,  and  an  imputation 
of  personal  motives.  I  propose  no  reply  to  all  this  ar- 
ray ;  least  of  all  shall  I  retort  hard  woitls,  or  repel  per- 
sonal imputations.  On  tliis  head  I  content  myself  with 
saying,  —  and  confidently,  too,  —  that,  Iiad  lie  known 
me  better,  the  Senator  from  Kentucky  [Mr.  Under- 
wood], who  is  usually  so  moderate  and  careful,  would 
have  hesitated  long  before  uttering  expressions  which 
fell  from  liim  in  tliis  debate. 

The  position  I  took  is  regarded  as  natural,  or  ex- 
cusable, in  a  Senator  from  one  of  the  Land  States,  act- 
ing under  the  vulgar  spur  of  local  interest;  but  it  is 
pronounced  unnatural  and  inexcusable  in  a  Senator 
from  Massachusetts.  Now,  Sir,  it  is  sufficient  for  me 
to  say,  in  reply  to  this  imputation,  that,  while  I  know 
there  are  influences  and  biases  incident  to  particular 
•States  or  sections  of  the  Union,  I  recognize  no  differ- 
ence in  tlie  duties  of  Senators  on  this  floor.  Coming 
from  ditfeient  States  and  opposite  sections,  we  are  all 
•^enatois  of  the  Union ;  and  our  constant  duty  is,  with- 
out fear  or  favor,  to  introduce  into  tlie  national  legisla- 
tion the  principle  of  justice.  In  this  spirit,  while  sus- 
tainii^  the  bill  before  the  Senate,  I  spoke  for  justice 
to  the  Land  States. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND    POLICY   OF   EOADS.  37 

In  my  present  course,  I  but  follow  the  example  of 
Senators  and  Eepresentatives  of  Massachusetts  on  kin- 
dred measures  from  their  earlieat  introduction  down  to 
the  present  time.  The  first  instance  was  in  1823,  on 
the  grant  to  the  State  of  Ohio  of  land  one  liundred  and 
twenty  feet  wide,  with  one  mile  on  each  side,  for  the 
construction  of  a  road  from  the  lower  rapids  of  the 
Miami  River  to  the  western  boundary  of  the  Connecti- 
cut Eesei-ve,  On  the  iinal  passage  of  this  grant  in  tlie 
House,  the  Massachusetts  delegation  voted  as  follows : 
Yeas,  — Samuel  C,  Allen,  Heniy  "W.  Dw^ht,  Timothy 
Fuller,  Jeremiah  Nelson,  John  Eeed,  Jonathan  Itussell ; 
Nay,  —  Benjaniui  Gorliam.  In  the  Senate  the  bill 
passed  without  a  division.  In  1828  a  still  greater  una- 
nimity oecmTed  on  the  passage  of  the  bill  to  aid  the 
State  of  Ohio  in  extending  the  Miami  Canal  from  Day- 
ton to  Lake  Erie ;  and  this  bill  is  an  early  instance  of 
the  grant  of  alternate  sections,  as  in  that  now  before  the 
Senate.  On  this  the  Massachusetts  delegation  in  the 
House  voted  as  follows :  Yeas,  —  Isaac  C.  Bates,  Ben- 
jamin W.  Crowninshield,  John  Davis,  Edward  Everett, 
John  Locke,  John  Eeed,  Joseph  Eichardsou,  John  Var- 
num;  Ways,  —  none.  In  the 'Senate,  Messrs.  Silsbee 
and  Webster  both  voted  in  the  affirmative.  I  pass  over 
intermediate  grants,  which,  I  am  told,  were  sustained  by 
the  Massachusetts  delegations  with  substantial  unanim- 
ity. The  extensive  grants,  by  the  last  Cor^ess,  to  Illi- 
nois, Mississippi,  and  Alabama,  in  aid  of  a  railroad  from 
Chicago  to  Mobile,  were  sustained  by  aU  the  Massachu- 
setts votes  in  the  House,  except  one. 

Still  further,  in  sustaining  the  present  bill  on  grounds 
of  justice  to  the  Land  States,  I  but  follow  the  record- 
ed instructions  of  the  Legislature  of  I ' 


■cibyGoogIc 


33  JUSTICE   TO    THE   LAKD    STATES, 

dressed  to  its  Senators  and  Eepresentatives  liere  on 
a  fonner  occasion.  The  subject  was  presented  in  a 
special  message  to  the  L^slature  in  1841,  by  the 
distiEguished  Governor  at  that  time,^  who  strongly- 
urged  "  a  liberal  policy  towards  the  actual  settler,  and 
towards  the  new  States,  for  this  is  justly  due  to  both." 
And  he  added:  "Such  States  are  entitled  to  a  more 
liberal  share  of  the  proceeds  of  the  public  lands  than 
the  old  States,  as  we  owe  to  theii'  enterprise  much  of 
the  value  this  property  has  acquired.  It  se&ms  to  me, 
therefore,  that  justice  towards  the  States  in  whdeh  these 
lands  lie  demands  a  liheral  and  generous  policy  towards 
them,,"^  In  accordance  with  this  recommendation,  it 
was  resolved  by  the  legislature,  "  That,  in  the  dispo- 
sition of  the  pubKc  lands,  this  Coni'monv:ealth  approves 
of  ■making  liberal  provisions  in  favor  of  the  new  States ; 
and  that  she  ever  has  been,  and  still  is,  ready  to  co- 
operate with  other  portions  of  the  Union  in  securing 
to  those  States  such  provisions."  ^  Thus  a  generous 
policy  towards  the  Land  States,  with  liberal  provisions 
in  their  favor,  was  considered  by  Massachusetts  the 
part  of  justice. 

It  was  my  purpose,  before  this  debate  closed,  to  con- 
sider again  the  argument  I  formerly  submitted,  and  to 
vindicate  its  accuracy  in  aU  respects,  both  in  principle 
and  in  detail.  But  this  has  already  been  so  amply  done 
by  others  much  abler  than  myself,  —  by  the  Senator 
from  Missouri  [Mr.  Geyer],  both  the  Senators  from 
Michigan  [Mr.  Felch  and  Mr.  Cass],  the  Senator  from 
Arkansas  [Mr.  Borland],  the  Senator  from  Iowa  [Mr. 

1  Hon.  John  Davla. 

»  Maaa.  Hou9B  Dooaments,  i841,  No.  33,  pp.  2,  8. 

>  Maes.  Acts  and  Resolves,  1841,  p.  422. 


;db,Googlc 


AND   POLICY   OF   HOADS.  39 

Dodge],  and  the  Senator  from  Louisiana  [Mr.  Downs], 
—  all  of  whom,  with  different  degrees  of  fulness,  have 
uiged  the  same  grounds  in  favor  of  this  bill,  that  I  feel 
imwilling  at  this  hour,  and  while  the  Senate  actually 
waits  to  vote  on  the  question,  to  occupy  time  by  further 
dwelling  upon  it.  Perhaps  on  some  other  occasion  I 
may  think  proper  to  return  to  it. 

But,  while  avoidii^  what  seems  superfluous  discus- 
sion, I  cannot  forbear  asking  your  attention  to  the 
amendment  of  the  Senator  from  Kentucky  [Mr.  Undek- 
wood]. 

This  amendment,  when  addressed  to  Senators  of  the 
favored  States,  is  of  a  most  plausible  chamcter.  It  pro- 
poses to  give  portions  of  the  public  domain  to  the  orig- 
inal Thirteen,  together  with  Vermont,  Maine,  Tennessee, 
and  Kentucky,  for  purposes  of  education  and  internal 
improvement,  at  the  rate  of  one  acre  to  each  inhabitant 
according  to  the  recent  census.  This  is  commended 
by  the  declared  objects,  —  education  and  internal  im- 
provement. Still  further,  in  its  discrimination  of  the 
old  States,  it  assumes  a  guise  well  calculated  to  tempt 
them  into  its  support.  It  holds  out  the  attraction  of 
seeming,  though  unsubstantial,  self-interest.  It  offers 
a  lure,  a  bait,  to  be  imjust.  I  object  to  it  on  several 
grounds. 

1.  But  I  put  in  the  fore-front,  as  my  chief  objection, 
its  clear,  indubitable,  and  radical  injustice,  written  on 
its  very  face.  The  amendment  confines  its  donations  to 
the  old  States,  and,  so  doing,  makes  an  inequitable  dis- 
crimination in  their  favor.  It  tacitly  assumes,  that,  by 
the  bill  in  question,  or  in  some  other  way,  the  Laud 
States  have  received  their  proper  distributive  portion,  so 
as  to  lose  all  title  to  share  with  the  old  States  in  the  pro- 


pel byGoOgIc 


40  JUSTICE   TO   THE   LAND    STATES, 

posed  distribution.  But,  if  there  be  any  force  in  tlie  ar- 
gument, so  much  considered  in  tliia  debate,  that  these 
railroad  grants  actually  enhance  the  value  of  the  ne^h- 
boring  lauds  of  the  United  States,  and  constitute  a 
proper  mode  of  bringing  them  into  the  market,  or  if 
there  be  any  force  in  the  other  argument  which  I  have 
presented,  drawn  from  the  eq^iutable  claims  of  the  Land 
States,  in  comparison  witii  the  other  States,  to  the 
bounty  of  the  great  wntaxed  pi-oprietor}  then  this  as- 
sumption is  unfounded.  There  is  no  basis  for  the  dis- 
crimination made  by  the  amendment  If  the  Iowa  Land 
BiU  be,  proper  without  this  amendment,  as  most  wiU 
admit,  then  this  amendment,  introducing  a  new  discrim- 
ination, is  improper.  Nor  do  I  well  see  how  any  one 
prepared  to  sustain  the  original  bill  can  sustain  the 
amendment.  The  Senator  from  Kentucky,  who  leads 
us  to  expect  his  vote  for  the  hill,  seems  to  confess  the 
injustice  of  his  attempted  addition. 

2.  I  object  to  it  as  out  of  place.  The  amendment  en- 
grafts upon  a  special  railroad  grant  to  a  single  State  a 
novel  distribution  of  the  national  domain.  Kow  there 
is  a  place  and  a  time  for  all  things ;  and  nothing  seems 
to  me  more  important  in  legislation  than  to  keep  all 
things  in  their  proper  place,  and  to  treat  them  at  their 
proper  time.  The  distribution  of  the  public  lands  is 
■worthy  of  attention ;  and  I  am  i-eady  to  meet  this  great 
question  whenever  it  arises  legitimately  for  our  consid- 
ei-ation ;  but  I  object  to  considering  it  merely  as  a  rider 
to  the  Iowa  Land  Bill. 

1  Ml'.  Webster,  in  his  greatcsf  Rpeeoh,  tlie  calebratefl  reply  to  Jlr.  Hnyne, 
tovic!ieil  on  this  consiilBriition.  He  said;  "  And,  finnllj',  hsve  not  these  new 
Sfntes  singularly  strong  claims,  founded  on  the  prounrt  nh'eady  stated,  that 
the  Govemment  is  a  grent  mitaied  proprietor  hi  theownerslilp  of  Uie  soil?"' 
—  Speechei,  Vol.  IIL  p.  291. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AUD   POLICY   OF   EOADS.  41 

The  amendment  would  be  less  olDJeckionable,  if  pro- 
posed as  a  rider  to  a  general  syatem  of  railroad  grants, 
—  as,  for  instance,  to  a  bill  embracing  gi-ants  to  all  the 
Land  States ;  but  it  ia  specially  objectionable  as  a  graft 
upon  the  present  bilL  The  Senator  who  introduced  it 
doubtless  assumed  tliat  other  bills,  already  introduced, 
would  pass  ;  but,  if  his  amendment  be  founded  on  this 
assumption,  it  should  wait  the  action  of  Congress  ou 
aR  these  bills. 

3.  ]f  adopted,  the  amendment  m^ht  endanger,  if  it 
did  not  defeat,  the  Iowa  Land  Bill.  This  seems  cei-tain. 
Having  this  measure  at  heart,  believing  it  founded  in 
essential  justice,  I  am  unwiUiug  to  place  it  in  this  jeop- 
ardy. 

4  It  prepares  the  way  for  States  of  this  Union  to  be- 
come landholders  in  other  States,  subject,  of  course,  to 
the  legislation  of  those  States,  —  an  expedient  which, 
though  not  strictly  objectionable  on  grounds  of  law,  or 
under  the  Constitution,  is  not  agreeable  to  our  national 
policy.  It  should  not  be  promoted  witliout  strong  and 
special  reasons.  In  the  bill  introduced  by  the  Senator 
from  Illinois  [Mr.  Shields],  bestowing  lands  for  the  ben- 
efit of  the  insane  in  different  States,  this  objection  is 
partially  obviated  by  providing  that  the  States  in  which 
there  are  no  public  lands  shall  select  their  portion  in 
the  Territories  of  the  United  States,  and  not  in  other 
States.  But,  since  in  a  short  time  these  very  Territories 
may  become  States,  this  objection  is  rather  adjounied 
than  removed. 

5.  Lands  held  under  this  amendment,  though  in  the 
hands  of  States,  will  be  liable  to  taxation,  as  lands  of 
other  non-resident  proprietors,  and  on  this  account  wiR 
be  comparatively  valueless.     For  this  reason  I  said  that 


■cibyGoogIc 


42  JUSTICE    TO    THE   LAND    STATES. 

the  amendment  held  out  the  attraction  of  seeming, 
though  unsubstantial,  self-interest.  That  the  lands  will 
he  liable  to  taxation  cannot  be  douhted.  The  amend- 
ment does  not  propose  in  any  way  to  relieve  them  from 
this  hurden,  nor  am  I  aware  that  they  can  he  relieved 
from  it.  The  existii^  immunity  is  only  so  long  as  they 
belong  to  the  United  States.  Now  tliere  is  reason  to 
heheve,  that,  from  lack  of  agencies  and  other  means  fa- 
miliar to  the  United  States,  the  lands  distributed  by  this 
amendment  would  not  find  as  prompt  a  market  as  those 
still  in  the  hands  of  the  Great  landholder.  But  how- 
ever this  may  be,  it  is  entirely  clear,  from  the  recorded 
experience  of  the  national  domain,  that  these  lands,  if 
sold  at  the  minimum  price  of  the  pubUc  lands,  and  only 
as  rapidly  as  those  of  the  Unit-ed  States,  and  if  mean- 
while they  are  subject  to  the  same  burdens  as  the  lands 
of  other  non-residents,  will,  before  the  sales  are  closed, 
be  eaten  up  by  the  taxes.  The  taxes  will  amount  to 
more  than  the  entire  receipts  from  sales ;  and  thus  the 
graiit,  while  unjust  to  the  Land  States,  will  he  worth-, 
less  to  the  old  States,  the  pretended  beneficiaries.  In 
the  Eoman  Law,  an  insolvent  inheritance  was  known  by 
an  expressive  phrase  as  damnosa  Jicereditas.  A  grant 
under  this  amendment  woiild  be  damnom  donatio. 

For  such  good  and  sufficient  reasons,  I  am  opposed  to 
this  amendment. 


■cibyGoogIc 


J.  FENIMOEE  COOPER,  THE  KOTELIST. 

Letter  to  the  Eev.  Rufus  W.  Orisivold,  Pebhuary  22,  1852. 


■Washinoton,  February  22,  1852. 

MY"  DEAE  SIR,-— It  is  not  in  my  power  to  be 
present  at  tiie  proposed  demonstration  in  memory 
of  the  late  Mr.  Cooper,  But  I  am  glad  of  the  oppor- 
tiniity,  aiforded  by  the  invitation  with  which  I  have 
been  honored,  to  express  my  regard  for  his  name  and 
"ly  joy  that  he  lived  and  wrote. 

As  an  author  of  clear  and  manly  prose,  as  a  portrayer 
to  the  life  of  scenes  on  land  and  sea,  as  a  master  of  the 
keys  to  human  feelings,  and  as  a  beneficent  contributor 
to  the  general  fund  of  happiness,  be  is  remembered 
with  delight. 

As  a  patriot  who  loved  his  country,  who  illustrated 
it^'  history,  who  advanced  its  character  abimd,  and  by 
his  genius  won  for  it  the  unwilling  regard  of  foreign 
nations,  he  deserves  a  place  in  the  hearts  of  the  Ameri- 
can people. 

I  have  seen  his  works  in  cities  of  France,  Italy,  and 
Germany.  In  all  these  conntries  he  was  read  and  ad- 
mired. Thus  by  his  pen  American  inteivention  was 
peacefully,  inoffensively,  and  triumphantly  carried  into 
the  heart  of  the  European  Continent. 

In  honoring  him  we  exalt  literatiire  and  the  thrice 


■cibyGoogIc 


44  J.  FENIMORE  COOPER,  THE  KOVELIST. 

Messed  arts  of  peace.  Our  country  will  leam  anew  from 
your  demonstration  that  there  are  glories  other  than 
those  of  state  or  war, 

I  have  the  honor  to  he,  dear  Sir, 

Your  ohedient  servant, 

Charles  Sumnee. 
Eev,  Rufus  W,  Griswold. 


■cibyGoogIc 


CHEAP  OCEAN  POSTAGE. 

SPFXcn  IN  THE  Senate,  on  a  Eesolution  is  Eelation  to  Cheap 
Ocean  Postage,  March  8,  1852. 


This  proposition  Mr.  Sumner  coiistantlj  renewed  at  auliBet[uent  si 
sions  of  Congress; 


M^ 


E.  PEESIDENT,  — I  submit  the  foUowing  reso- 
lution.   As  it  is  one  of  inq^uiiy,  I  ask  that  it  may 
be  considered  at  this  time. 

Eetohed  Thit  the  CommittLe  on  Naval  Afiairs,  while 
considenng  the  n^tuie  ind  extent  of  aid  proper  to  be  grant- 
ed to  the  Ocein  Steimers  be  diiected  to  inquire  whether  tbe 
present  chnigee  foi  letters  earned  by  these  steamers  are  not 
I  nnecessanly  laige  and  buideubime  to  foreign  correspond- 
ence and  whether  s  meth  ug  may  not  be  done,  and,  if  bo, 
what  to  secure  the  great  boon  of  Cheap  Ocean  Postage. 

^  stated  to  be  on  the  adop- 

Mr.  President,  — The  Committee  on  Kaval  Affairs 
have  the  responsibility  of  shaping  some  measure  by 
which  the  relations  of  our  Government  with  the  ocean 
steamers  will  be  defined.  And  since  one  special  induce- 
ment to  these  relations,  involving  the  bounty  now  en- 
joyed and  further  solicited,  is  the  carrying  of  the  mails,  I 
trust  this  Committee  will  be  willing  to  inq^uire  whether 


■cibyGoogIc 


46  CHEAP    OCEAN    POBTARE. 

there  cannot  be  a  reduction  on  tlie  postage  of  foreign 
correspondence.  Under  the  Postage  Act  of  1851,  the 
Postmaster,  by  and  with  the  advice  of  the  President,  has 
power  to  reduce,  from  time  to  time,  the  rates  of  postage 
on  all  mailable  matter  conveyed  between  the  United 
States  and  any  foreign  country.  But  the  existence  of 
this  power  in  the  Postmaster  will  not  render  it  improper 
for  the  Committee,  now  drawn  into  connection  witli  this 
question,  to  take  it  into  careful  consideration,  witli  a 
view  to  some  practical  action,  or,  at  least,  recommen- 
dation. The  subject  ia  of  peculiar  interest ;  nor  do  I 
know  any  measure,  so  easily  accomplished,*  which  prom- 
ises to  be  so  beneficent  as  cheap  ocean  postage.  The 
argument  in  its  favor  is  at  once  brief  and  unanswer- 
able, 

A  letter  can  be  sent  three  thousand  miles  in  the 
United  States  for  three  cents,  and  the  reasons  for  cheap 
postage  on  land  are  equally  applicable  to  ocean. 

In  point  of  fact,  the  conveyance  of  letters  can  be 
effected  in  sailing  or  steam  packets  at  less  cost  than 
by  railway. 

Besides,  cheap  ocean  postage  will  tend  to  supersede 
the  clandestine  or  illicit  conveyance  of  letters,  and  to 
bring  into  the  mails  all  mailable  matter,  which,  under 
the  present  system,  is  carried  in  the  pockets  of  passen- 
gers or  in  the  bales  and  boxes  of  merchants. 

All  new  facilities  for  correspondence  naturally  give 
new  expansion  to  human  intercourse ;  and  there  is  rea- 
son to  believe,  that,  through  an  increased  number  of  let- 
ters, cheap  ocean  postage  will  be  self-supporting. 

Cheap  postal  communication  with  foreign  countries 
will  be  of  incalculable  importance  to  the  commerce  of 
the  United  States. 


■cibyGoogIc 


CHEAP  OCEAN  POSTAGE.  47 

By  promoting  the  intercourse  of  families  and  friends 
separated  ty  ocean,  cheap  postage  will  add  to  the  sum 
of  human  happiness. 

The  present  high  rates  of  ocean  postage — namely, 
twenty-four  cents  on  half  an  ounce,  forty-eight  cents  on 
an  ounce,  and  ninety-six  cents  on  a  letter  which  weighs 
a  fraction  more  than  aa  ounce  —  are  a  severe  tax  up- 
on all,  particularly  upon  the  poor,  amounting,  in  many 
cases,  to  a  complete  prohibition  of  foreign  correspond- 
ence.    This  should  not  be. 

It  particularly  becomes  our  country,  by  the  removal 
of  all  unnecessary  burdens  upon  foreign  correspondence, 
to  advance  the  comfort  of  European  emigrants  seeking 
a  home  among  us,  and  to  destroy,  as  far  as  practicable, 
every  barrier  to  free  intercourse  between  the  Old  World 
and  the  New. 

.  And,  lastly,  cheap  ocean  postage  will  be  a  bond  of 
peace  among  the  nations  of  the  earth,  and  wiU  extend 
good-will  among  men. 

By  such  reasons  this  measure  is  commended.  Much 
as  I  rejoice  in  the  American  steamers,  which  vindicate 
a  peaceful  supremacy  of  the  seas,  and  help  to  weave  a 
golden  tissue  between  the  two  hemispheres,  I  cannot 
consider  these,  with  all  their  unquestionable  advantages, 
an  equivalent  for  cheap  ocean  postage,  I  trust  that 
they  are  not  inconsistent  with  each  other,  and  that  both 
may  flourish  together. 

Objection  was  mada  to  the  resolntion,  as  not  Iwing  addressed  to  the 
proper  Committee,  and  a  hrief  debate  eiianed,  in  which  Mr.  Rusk,  Mr. 
Gwiii,  Mr.  Bftiiger,  Mr.  Davis,  Mr.  Sewaid,  Mr.  Mnson,  and  Mr.  Suninor 
took  part.  It  was  nrged  by  the  last,  in  reply,  that  the  Committee  on 
Naval  AHairs  waa  the  proper  Committee,  us  at  the  present  moment  it  is 
specially  charged  with  a  subject  intimately  connected  with  the  inquiry 


■cibyGoogIc 


48  CHEAP   OCEAN  POSTAGE. 

propospd.  At  the  suggestion  of  Mr.  Eiidgcr  the  matter  was  allowed  to 
lie  oyer  till  the  next  day. 

On  Tuesday,  March  0th,  the  Senate  proceeded  to  consider  the  reso- 
lution submitted  by  Mr.  Simmer  on  the  8th,  rehitive  to  Ocean  Steam- 
ers and  Cheap  Ocean  Postage.  On  motion  of  Mr.  Sumner,  it  was 
amended,  and  finally  adopted,  without  opposition,  as  follows  :  — - 

"Iliaoli>ed,  That  tba  Committee  on  the  Post  Office  and  Post  Roads  be 
direcied  to  inquire  whether  tlie  present  charges  on  letters  carried  by  the 
Ocean  Steamers  are  not  unnecessarily  large  and  burdensomo  to  foreign  cor- 
respondence, and  whether  something  may  not  be  done,  and,  if  so,  what,  to 
eecrn^  the  great  boon  of  Cheap  Ocean  Postage." 


;db,Googlc 


THE  PAEDONIHG  POWER  OP  THE  PKESIDEHT. 

3    THE    PrESTDEKT,  MaY  14,    1852,  ON   THE  Ap- 

Pardon  of  Dbayton  and  Sayi 
helping  the  uscape  o 


This  esse,  from  beginning  to  end,  is  a  ei;iiii>iis  episode  of  AnlJslaTeiy 
history.  The  people  of  Waaliingtoii  were  sarprised,  on  the  morning  of 
April  16,  1848,  at  hearing  that  the  "Pearl,"  a  schooner  from  the  North, 
hnd  BaQed  down  the  Potomac  with  seventy-six  slaves,  who  had  hurried 
aboard  in  the  vain  hope  of  obtaining  their  freedom.  The  schooner  was 
pursued  and  brought  baet  to  Washington  with  her  human  cargo,  and 
the  liberators,  Drayton,  master,  and  Sayrea,  mate.  As  the  latter  were 
taken  from  the  river-side  to  the  jail,  they  were  followed  by  a  proslavery 
mob,  estimated  at  from  four  to  six  thousand  people,  many  aimed  with 
deadly  weapons,  amid  wratliful  cries  of,  "  Hang  him  1 "  "  Lynch  him  I  " 
with  all  profanities  and  abominations  of  speeeh,  and  exposed  to  violence 
of  all  kinds,  —  the  thrust  of  a  dirk-knife  coming  within  an  inch  of 
Drayton.  Thesamemobbesiegedthejail,  and,  hearing  that  Hon.  Joshua 
E.  Giddings,  the  brave  Eepresentative  of  Ohio,  was  there  in  consultation 
with  the  prisoners,  demanded  his  immediate  expulsion,  and  the  jailer, 
to  save  bloodshed,  insisted  upon  Us  departure  Hor  was  the  pierall 
ing  rage  confined  to  the  jail  It  extended  to  the  office  of  the  National 
Era,"  the  Antislavery  pajer  which  was  savel  from  destination  only 
through  the  courage  and  calmness  of  its  admirable  edifoi  The  spmt 
of  the  mob  entered  both  Houses  of  C  nigress,  and  the  sKve  masters 

Meanwhile  Drayton  and  Savres  'mere  indict"!  bcfort  the  Criminal 
Court  of  the  Distiict  of  Columl  la  for  '  transporting  slives  There 
were  no  less  than  one  handled  and  hfteen  inlietments  igainot  eiiSh  tf 
the  prisoners,  and  the  hail  demanded  of  ea'  h  wis  seventy  is  thousand 
dollars.  Hon.  Horace  Mann  a  Repiesentative  of  Massachusetts,  ap 
peared  for  the  defence.  His  speech  on  this  occasion  will  he  read  with 
constant  interest.'  The  spirit  of  the  mob  without  entered  the  court- 
'  Slavery ;  Lellera  and  Speeches  by  Horace  Mann,  pp.  B4  - 118, 


;db,Googlc 


50         THE  PARDONIKG   POWER  OF  THE  PRESIDENT. 

room,  betraying  itself  even  in  the  conduct  of  the  judge,  while  standing 
near  tlie  devoted  counsel  for  the  defence  were  men  who  cocked  pistols 
and  drew  ditkfi  in  tie  mob  that  followed  the  piisoiiars  f«  the  jail.  Of 
course  the  verdict  was  "Gnilty,"  and  the  sentence  was  according  to 
the  extreme  requirement  of  a  barbarous  law. 

Drayton  and  Sayres  lingered  in  prison  more  than  four  years,  and  dur- 
ing this  long  incarceration  they  were  the  objects  of  much  spipathy 
at  the  Horth.  A  petition  to  Congress  in  their  behalf,  signed  by  leading 
Abolitionists,  inclnding  the  eloquent  Wendell  Phillips,  was  forwarded 
to  Mr.  Sumner  for  presentation  to  the  Senate.  On  careful  considera- 
tion, he  was  satisfied  that  such  a  petition,  if  presented,  would  excite 
the  dominant  power  to  insist  more  strongly  thatt  ever  on  the  letter  of 
the  law,  and  he  took  the  responsibility  of  withholding  it.  Meanwhile 
he  visited  the  sufferers  in  prison,  and  appealed  to  President  Fillmore  for 
their  pardon.  In  this  application  he  was  aided  by  that  humane  lady, 
■Miss  Dix.  The  President  interposed  doubts  of  his  right  to  paivlon  in 
such  a  ease,  but  expressed  a  desire  for  light  on  this  point.  At  his  invi- 
tation, Mr.  Sumner  Idd  before  hun  the  following  paper,  which  was  re- 
ferred to  the  Attorney- GenetaA,  Mr.  Crittenden,  who  gave  an  opinion 
affirming  the  power  of  the  President,  —  adding,  however,  "Whether  the 
power  shall  be  exercised  in  this  inatanoe  is  another  and  very  diffeiient 
question." '  This  opinion  baara  date  August  4,  1852,  which,  it  will  be 
observed,  was  some  time  after  the  Presidential  Conventions  of  the  two 
great  political  parties.     Shoi'tly  afterwards  the  pardon  wns  gi'anted. 

There  was  reason  to  believe  that  an  attempt  would  bfl  made  to  arrest 
the  pardoned  persons  on  warrants  from  the  Governor  of  Vhginia.  An- 
ticipating this  peril,  Mr.  Sumner,  as  soon  as  the  pardon  was  signed, 
hurried  to  the  jail  in  a  carriage,  and,  taking  them  with  him,  put  them 
in  charge  of  a  friend,  who  conveyed  them  that  night  to  Baltimore,  a 
distance  of  forty  miles,  where  they  arrived  in  season  for  the  early  morn- 
ing trains  North,  and  in  a  few  hours  were  out  of  danger. 

BY  the  law3  of  Maryland,  1737,  chapter  2,  section  4, 
it  is  provided  that  any  person  "who  shall  steal 
any  n^ro  or  other  slave,  or  who  ahaU  counsel,  hire, 
aid,  ahet,  or  command  any  peraon  or  persons "  to  do  so, 
"shall  suffer  death  as  a  felon."  The  punishment  has 
since  heen  chained  to  imprisonment,  for  a  term  not 
less  than  seven  nor  more  than  twenty  years. 
1  Opinions  of  Attomejs-Oaneral,  Vol.  V.  pp.  ESO-691. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  PAEDONISG  POWER   OF  THE   PRESIDENT.         51 

Fourteen  years  later,  hy  the  act  of  1751,  chapter  14, 
section  10,  it  was  provided,  that,  "if  any  free  person 
shall  entice  and  persuade  any  slave  within  this  province 
to  run  away,  and  wlio  shall  actually  run  away,  from  the 
master,  owner,  or  overseer,  and  be  convicted  thereof,  by 
confession,  or  verdict  of  a  jury  upon  an  indictment  or 
information,  shall  forfeit  and  pay  the  fuU  value  of  auch 
slave  to  the  master  or  owner  of  such  slave,  to  be  levied 
by  execution  on  the  goods,  chattels,  lands,  or  tenements 
of  the  offender,  and,  in  case  of  inability  to  pay  the  same, 
shall  suffer  one  year's  imprisonment  without  bail  or 
mainprise." 

StiU  later,  by  the  act  of  1796,  chapter  67,  section  19, 
"the  transportii^  of  any  slave  or  any  person  held  to 
service "  from  the  State  was  made  a  distinct  offence, 
for  which  the  offender  was  Hable  in  an  action  of  damages, 
and  also  by  indictment. 

By  the  Act  of  Congress  organizing  the  District  of 
Columbia  (Febniary  27, 1801)  it  was  declared,  that  "the 
laws  of  the  State  of  Maryland,  as  they  now  exist,  shall 
he  and  continue  in  force  in  that  part  of  the  said  Dis- 
trict which  was  ceded  by  that  State  to  the  United  States, 
and  by  them  accepted  as  aforesaid."  Under  this  pro- 
vision, these  ancient  laws  of  Maryland  are  to  this  day 
of  full  force  in  the  District  of  Columbia. 

The  facts  to  be  considered  are  few.  Messrs.  Drayton 
and  Sayres,  on  indictment  and  trial,  imder  the  act  of  1737, 
for  steaUng  slaves,  were  acquitted,  the  jury  rendering 
a  verdict  of  "  Not  guilty."  P.esort  was  then  had  to  the 
statute  of  1796,  chapter  67,  section  19,  as  follows. 

"And  be  it  enacted,  That  any  person  or  persona,  who  shall 
hereafter  be  convicted  of  giving  a  pass  to  any  slave,  or  per- 


■cibyGooglc 


52  TilR   TAKDONING   POWER    01?    THE    PliliSIDENT, 

SOU  held  to  service,  or  shall  be  found  to  ai^ist,  by  advice, 
donation,  or  loan,  or  otherwise,  the  transportii^  of  any- 
slave,  or  any  pOMon  held  to  service,  from  this  State,  or  by 
any  other  unlawful  means  depriving  a  master  or  owner  of 
the  service  of  his  slave,  or  person  held  to  service,  for  every 
such  offenoe  the  party  a^rieved  shall  recover  damages  in  an 
action  on  the  case  against  such  offender  or  offenders ;  and 
such  oflender  or  offendei-s  also  shall  bo  liable,  upon  indict- 
ment, and  conviction  upon  verdict,  confession,  or  otherwise, 
in  this  State,  in  any  county  court  where  such  offence  shall 
happen,  [to]  be  fined  a  sum  not  exceeding  two  hundi-ed  dol- 
lars, at  the  discretion  of  the  court,  one  half  to  the  use  of  the 
master  or  owner  of  such  slave,  the  other  half  to  the  county 
school,  in  case  there  be  any ;  if  no  such  school,  to  the  use  of 
the  county." 

Under  this  statute,  proceedings  were  instituted  by  tlis 
Attorney  of  the  Piatrict  of  Columbia  against  these  par- 
ties, in  seventy-four  different  indictments,  each  indict- 
ment being  founded  on  the  alleged  "transporting"  of  a 
single  slava  On  conviction,  Dra3i;on  was  sentenced  on 
each  indictment  to  a  fine  of  $140  and  costs,  in  eacli 
case  $19.'49,  amounting  in  the  sum-total  to  $11,802.26. 
On  conviction,  Sayres  was  sentenced  on  each  indict- 
ment to  a  fine  of  $100  and  costs,  in  each  case  $17.38, 
amounting  in  the  sum-total  to  $8,686.12.  One  half  of 
the  fine  was,  according  to  law,  to  the  use  of  the  masters 
or  owners  of  the  slaves  transported ;  the  other  half,  to  the 
county  school,  —  or,  in  case  there  were  no  such  school,  to 
tlie  use  of  the  county.  Afterwards,  on  motion  of  the 
Attorney  for  the  District,  they  were  "prayed  in  commit- 
ment," and  committed  until  the  fine  and  costs  should  be 
paid.  In  pursuance  of  this  sentence,  and  on  this  mo- 
tion, they  have  been  detained  in  prison,  in  the  City  o£ 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE   rARDONING   POWER   OF   THE   PEF.SIDENT.  53 

■Washington,  since  Apiil,  1848,  and  are  still  in  prison,  un- 
able from  poverty  to  pay  these  hrge  fines.  The  q^uestiou 
now  occurs  as  to  the  power  of  the  President  to  pardon 
them,  so  at  least  as  to  relieve  t/ieni  from  imprisonment. 

The  peculiar  embarrassment  in  this  case  arises  from 
the  nature  of  the  sentence.  If  it  were  simply  a  sentence 
of  imprisonment,  the  power  of  the  President  would  be 
tmquestionable.  So,  also,  if  it  were  a  sentence  of  un- 
prisonmenfc,  with  fine  superadded,  payable  to  the  United 
States,  his  power  would  be  unq^uestionable ;  and  the  same 
power  would  extend  to  the  case  of  a  fine  payable  to  the 
United  States,  with  imprisonment  as  the  alternative  on 
non-payment  of  the  fine. 

But  in  the  present  case  imprisonment  is  the  alter- 
native for  non-payment  of  fines  wliich  are  not  pay- 
able to  the  United  States,  but  to  other  parties,  name- 
ly) the  slave-owners  and  the  county.  It  is  important, 
however,  to  bear  in  mind  that  these  fines  are  a  mere 
donation  to  these  parties,  and  not  a  compen.sation  for 
services  rendered.  Tliese  parties  are  not  informere, 
nor  were  tlie  proceedings  in  the  nature  of  a  qtd  tarn 
action. 

It  should  be  distinctly  understood,  at  the  outset,  that 
the  proceedings  against  Drayton  and  Sayres  were  not  at 
the  suit  of  any  informer  or  private  individual,  but  at  the 
prosecution  of  the  United  States  hy  indictment.  Tliey 
are  therefore  removed  from  the  authority  of  t]ie  Eng- 
lish cases,  which  protect  the  share  of  an  informer  after 
judgment  from  remission  hy  pardon  from  the  crown. 

The  power  of  the  President  in  the  present  case  may 
be  regarded,  first,  in  the  light  of  the  Common  Law,  ~ 


■cibyGoogIc 


54  THE   rAEDOmNG  POWER   OF   THE   PRESIDENT. 

secondly,  under  tlie  statutes  of  Maryland,  —  and,  thirdly, 
under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

Mrst  As  to  the  Common  Zaiv,  it  may  he  douhtful, 
whether,  accordii^  to  early  authorities,  the  pardoning 
power  can  be  used  so  as  to  bar  or  divest  any  legal  inter- 
eat,  benefit,  or  advantage  vested  in  a  private  individual. 
It  is  broadly  stated  by  English  writers  that  it  cannot 
be  so  used.  (2  Hawkins,  P.  C,  392,  Book  II.,  chap.  37, 
sec.  34 ;  17  Viner's  Abridgment,  39,  Prerogative  of  the 
King,  U.  art.  7.)  But  this  principle  does  not  seem  to  be 
sustained  by  practical  cases  in  the  United  States,  except 
in  the  instances  of  informers  and  qui  tam  actions,  while, 
on  one  occasion,  in  a  leading  case  of  Kentucky,  it  was 
rejected.     {Boutt  v.  Feemster,  7  J.  J-  Marshall,  132.) 

But  it  is  clearly  established,  that,  where  the  fine  is  al- 
lotted to  a  public  body,  or  a  pnbUc  officer,  for  a  public 
purpose,  it  may  be  remitted  by  pardon.  This  may  be 
illustrated  by  several  cases. 

1.  As  where,  in  Pennsylvania,  the  fine  was  for  the 
benefit  of  the  county.  In  this  case  the  Court  said :  "  Un- 
til the  money  is  collected  and  paid  into  the  treasury, 
tlie  constitutional  right  of  the  Governor  to  pardon  the 
offender,  and  remit  the  fine  or  forfeiture,  remains  in  fiill 
force.  They  can  have  no  more  vested  interest  in  the 
money  than  the  Commonwealth,  under  the  same  cir- 
ciimstances,  would  have  had ;  and  it  cannot  be  doubted, 
tlmt,  until  the  money  reaches  tlie  treasury,  the  G-ovemor 
has  the  power  to  remit In  the  case  of  costs,  pri- 
vate persons  are  interested  in  them ;  but  as  to  fines  and 
forfeitures,  tliey  are  imposed  upon  principles  of  public 
policy.  Tlie  latter,  therefore,  are  under  the  exclusive 
control  of  tlie  Governor."     {Gonimomvealth  v. . 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  PAKDONING  POWER  OF  THE  PRESIDENT.         55 

9  Watts,  142.)  The  same  point  is  also  illustrated  by 
a  case  in  IlKnois.  {Holliday  y.  The  People,  5  Gilmoa, 
214-217.) 

2.  As  where,  in  Georgia,  the  fine  was  to  be  paid  to 
an  inferior  court  for  county  purposes.  (In  Be  Moumoy, 
Attorney-General,  1  Kelly,  606-610.) 

3.  As  where,  in  South  Carolina,  the  fine  was  to  be 
paid  to  the  Commissioners  of  Public  Buildings,  for  pub- 
lic purposes,  [The  State  v.  Simpson,  1  Bailey,  378,)  or 
the  Commissioners  of  the  Roads.  {The  State  v.  Wil~ 
Hams,  1  Nott  &  McCord,  26.  See  also  Eowe  v.  The  State 
2  Bay,  565.) 

According  to  these  authorities,  the  portion  of  the  fine 
allotted  to  the  county,  or  to  the  school,  may  be  remitted. 
Of  this  there  can  be  no  doiibt. 


The  Statutes  of  Mart/land,  anterior  to  the 
organization  of  the  District  of  Columbia,  may  also  be 
regai-ded  as  an  independent  source  of  Hght  on  this  ques- 
tion, since  these  statutes  are  made  the  law  of  the  Dis- 
trict.    And  here  the  conclusion  seems  to  be  easy. 

By  the  Constitution  of  Maryland,  adopted  November 
8th,  1776,  it  is  declared:  "Tlie  Governor  may  grant 
reprieves  or  pardons  for  any  crime,  except  in  such  cases 
where  the  law  shall  otherwise  direct."  Notwithstanding 
these  strong  words  of  grant,  which  seem  to  be  as  broatl 
as  the  Common  Law,  it  was  furtlier,  as  if  to  remove  all 
doubt,  deekred  by  the  Legislature,  in  1782  (Chap.  42, 
sec.  3):  "That  the  Governor,  with  the  advice  of  the 
Council,  be  authorized  to  remit  the  whole  or  any  part 
of  any  fine,  penalty,  or  forfeiture,  heretofore  imposed, 
or  hereafter  to  be  imposed,  in  any  court  of  law."  Here 
is  no  exception  or  limitation  of  any  kind.     By  e 


■cibyGoogIc 


56  THE    PARDOSING   PO"WER    OF   THE    PUESIDEXT. 

words,  tliQ  Governor  is  authorized  to  remit  the  whole  or 
any  part  of  any  fine.  Of  course,  under  this  clause  he 
oaimot  remit  a  private  deht;  hut  he  may  remit  any  Jine. 
The  question  is  not,  whether  the  fine  he  payable  to  the 
United  States  or  other  parties,  hut  whether  it  is  a  fine. 
If  it  be  a  fine,  it  is  in  the  power  of  the  Governor. 

This  view  is  strengthened  by  the  circmnstance,  tliat 
in  Maryland,  accordir^  to  several  statutes,  fines  are  al- 
lotted to  parties  other  than  the  Government.  The  very 
statute  of  1796,  under  which  these  proceedings  were  had, 
was  passed  subsequently  to  tliis  provision  respecting  the 
remission  of  fines.  It  must  be  interpreted  iu  harmony 
with  the  earher  statute;  and  since  all  these  statutes 
are  now  the  law  of  Uie  District  of  Columbia,  the  power 
of  the  President,  under  these  laws,  to  remit  these  fines, 
seems  established  without  special  reference  to  the  Com- 
mon Law  or  to  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

If  this  were  not  the  case,  two  different  hardships 
would  ensue:  first,  the  statute  of  1782  would  be  de- 
spoiled of  its  natural  efficacy ;  and,  secondly,  the  minor 
offence  of  "  transporting  "  a  single  slave  would  be  pun- 
ishable, on  non-payment  of  the  fine,  with  imprisonment 
for  life,  while  the  higher  offence  of  "  steahng  "  a  slave  is 
punishable  with  imprisomnent  for  a  specific  term,  and 
the  other  offence  of  "  enticing  "  a  slave  is  punishable 
with  a  fine  larger  than  that  for  transporting  a  slave, 
and,  on  non-payment  thereof,  imprisonment  for  one  year 
only. 

Thirdly.  Look  at  the  case  under  the  Gmistitiition  of 
the  United  States. 

By  the  Constitution,  the  President  has  power  "to 
grant  reprieves  and  pardons  for  offences  against   the 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE   PAKDOUING    POWER    OF    THE    PRESIDENT.  57 

United  States,  except  in  cases  of  impeaehment."  Ac- 
cording to  a  familiar  rule  of  interpretation,  the  single 
specified  exception  leaves  the  power  of  the  President 
appUcable  to  all  other  cases :  Eaypressio  %nius  exdusio 
est  alleritis.  Mr.  Berrien,  in  one  of  his  opinions  as  At- 
torney-General, recognizes  "  the  pardoning  power  as  co- 
extensive with  the  power  to  punish " ;  and  he  quotes 
with  approbation  the  words  of  another  writer,  tliat  "  the 
power  is  general  and  unqualified,"  and  that  "  the  remis- 
sion of  fines,  penalties,  and  forfeitures,  under  the  rev- 
enue laws,  is  included  in  it."  (Opinions  of  the  Attor- 
neys-General, Vol.  I.  p,  756.) 

On  this  power  Mr.  Justice  Story  thus  remarks  :  "  The 
power  of  remission  of  fines,  penalties,  and  forfeitures  ia 
also  included  in  it,  and  may,  in  the  last  resort,  be  exer- 
cised by  the  Executive,  although  it  is  in  many  cases  by 
our  laws  confided  to  the  Treasury  Department.  No  law 
can  abridge  the  constitutional  powers  of  the  Executive 
Department,  or  interrupt  its  right  to  interpose  by  pardon 
in  such  cases.  —  Instances  of  the  exercise  of  this  power 
by  the  President,  in  remitting  fines  and  penalties,  in 
cases  not  within  the  scope  of  the  laws  giving  authority 
to  the  Treasury  Department,  have  repeatedly  occurred, 
and  their  obligatory  force  has  never  been  questioned." 
(Story,  Com.  on  Constitution,  Vol.  II.  §  1504.) 

It  has  been  decided  by  the  Supreme  Court,  after 
elaborate  argument,  that  "  the  Secretary  of  the  Treasury 
has  authority,  under  the  Remission  Act  of  the  3d  of 
March,  1797,  chap.  361,  to  remit  a  forfeiture  or  penalty 
accruing  under  the  revenue  laws,  at  any  time,  before  or 
after  a  final  sentence  of  condemnation  or  judgment  for 
the  penalty,  until  the  money  is  actually  paid  over  to  the 
Collector  for  distribution " ;  and  that  "  such  remission 


■cibyGoogIc 


58         THE  PARDONISG  POWEE   OF  THE  PRESIDENT. 

extends  to  the  shares  of  the  forfeiture  or  penalty  to 
which  the  officers  of  the  customs  are  entitled,  as  ■well 
as  to  the  interest  of  the  United  States."  In  giving  his 
opinion  on  this  occasion,  Mr.  Justice  Johnson,  of  South 
OaroUna,  made  use  of  language  much  in  point.  "  Mercy 
and  justice,"  he  said,  "  could  only  have  been  adminis- 
tered by  halves,  if  collectors  could  have  hurried  causes 
to  judgment,  and  tlien  clung  to  the  one  half  of  the  for- 
feiture, in  contempt  of  the  cries  of  distress  or  the  man- 
dates of  the  Secretary."  {United  States  v.  Morris,  10 
Wheaton,  303.) 

A  case  has  occurred  in  Kentucky,  to  which  reference 
has  been  already  made,  in  which  it  is  confidently  and 
broadly  assumed  that  the  pardoning  power  under  the 
Constitution  extends  even  to  the  penalties  due  to  in- 
formei^.  The  following  passage  occurs  in  the  opinion 
of  the  Court.  "  The  act  of  1823  says  that  any  prose- 
cuting attorney,  who  shall  prosecute  any  person  to  con- 
viction under  it,  shall  be  entitled  to  twenty-five  per  cent 

of  the  amount  of  such  fine  as  shall  be  collected 

The  act  gives  the  prosecuting  attorney  one  fourth  of 
the  money,  when  collected,  hut  vests  him  with  no  inter- 
est in  the  fine  or  sentence,  separate  and  distinct  from 
that  of  the  Commonwealth,  that  would  screen  his  share 
from  the  effect  of  any  legal  operation  which  should,  be- 
fore collection,  abrogate  the  whole  or  a  part  of  it.  It 
would  require  language  of  the  strongest  and  most  ex- 
plicit ch^^acter  to  authorize  a  presumption  that  the 
Legislature  intended  to  confer  any  such  right.  We 
could  never  presume  an  intention  to  control  the  Gover- 
nor's constitutional  power  to  remit  fines  and  forfeitures. 
1/  he  can  in  thds  ivay  he  restrained  in  the  exeixise  of  his 
power  to  remit  for  the  fmwth  of  a  fine,  so  can  he  he  for 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  PARDONING  POWER  OF  THE  PKESIDENT.         59 

ike  half  or  the  whoSe.  This  part  of  Jm  prerogative  cannot 
be  curtailed.  With  the  exception  of  the  case  of  treason, 
his  pamr  to  remit  fines  and  forfeitures,  gra/nt  reprieves 
and  pardons,  is  unlimited,  illimitable,  and  uncontivllable. 
It  has  no  bounds  hut  his  own  discretion.  lb  is  no  doubt 
politic  and  proper  for  the  Legislature  to  incite  prosecut- 
ing attorneys  and  informers,  by  giving  them  a  portion  of 
fines,  when  collected ;  hut  in  so  doing  the  citizen  can- 
not be  deban«d  of  his  right  of  appeal  to  executive  clem- 
ency."  {Boutt  V.  Feemstcr,  7  J.  J.  Marshall,  132.) 

According  to  these  authoritiea,  it  seems  reasonable  to 
infer,  that,  under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
the  pardoning  power,  wliich  is  clearly  applicable  to  the 
offence  of  "transporting"  slaves  of  the  District,  might 
remit  the  penalties  in  question.  These  penalties,  though 
allotted  to  the  owners  and  the  county,  when  finally  col- 
lected, are  neither  more  nor  less  than  the  punishment, 
under  sentence  of  a  criminal  court,  for  an  offence  of 
which  the  parties  stand  convicted  upon  indictment. 
They  can  be  collected  ^d  acquitted  only  by  the  United 
States.  No  process  for  this  purpose  is  at  the  command 
of  tlie  slave-owner.  He  had  no  control  whatever  over 
the  prosecution  at  any  stage,  nor  did  it  proceed  at  his 
suggestion  or  information.  The  very  statute  under 
which  these  pnhlic  proceedii^s  were  instituted  in  the 
name  of  the  United  States  secured  to  the  slave-owner 
his  private  action  on  the  case  for  damages, —  thus  sepa- 
rating the  public  from  the  private  mterest^.  These  it 
seems  the  duty  of  the  President  to  keep  separate,  except 
on  the  final  collection  and  distribution  of  tlie  penalties. 
Public  policy  and  the  ends  of  justice  require  that  the 
punishment  for  a  criminal  offence  sho\ild,  in  every  case, 
be  exclusively  subject  to  the  supreme  pardoning  power, 


■cibyGoogIc 


60  THE   PAEDONING    POWER   OF   THE   PRESIDENT. 

without  dependence  upon  the  will  of  any  private  person. 
An  ohvions  case  will  illustrate  this.  Suppose^  in  the 
case  of  Drayion  and  Sayres;  it  should  he  ascertained 
tieyond  douht  that  the  convictiou  -was  procured  hy  per- 
jury. If,  by  virtue  of  the  judgment,  the  slave-owners 
have  an  interest  in  the  imprisonment  of  these  men  which 
cannot  be  touched,  then  the  prisoners,  unable  to  meet 
these  heavy  liabilities,  must  continue  in  perpetual  im- 
prisonment, or  owe  their  release  to  the  accident  of  pri- 
vate good-will  The  Pi-eaident,  notwithstanding  his  be- 
neficent power  to  pardon,  under  the  Constitution,  will 
be  powerless  to  remedy  this  evil.  But  such  a  state  of 
things  would  he  monstrous ;  and  any  interpretation  of 
the  Constitution  is  monstrous  which  thus  ties  his  hands, 
Mercy  and  justice  would  be  rendered  not  merely  ly 
halves,  but,  owing  to  the  inability  of  prisoners,  from 
poverty,  to  pay  the  other  half  of  the  fine,  they  would 
be  entirely  arrested. 

The  power  of  pardon,  which  is  attached  by  the  Con- 
stitution to  offences  generally,  should  not  be  curtailed. 
It  is  a  generous  prerogative,  and  should  be  exercised 
generously.  Boni  Judicis  est  wmptiare  jurtsdictioTteirt. 
This  is  an  old  maxim  of  the  law.  But  if  it  be  the  duty 
of  a  good  judge  to  extend  his  jurisdiction,  how  much 
more  is  it  the  duty  of  a  good  President  to  extend  the 
field  of  his  clemency !  At  least,  no  small  doubt  should 
deter  him  from  the  exercise  of  his  prerogative. 

The  conclusion  from  this  review  is  as  follows. 

1.  By  the  English  Common  Law  the  costs  and  one 
half  of  the  fines  may  be  remitted.  It  is  not  certain 
that  by  this  law,  as  adopted  in  the  United  States,  the 
other  half  of  the  fines  may  not  also  be  remitted. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  TAKDONISG  POWER   OP  THE  PRESIDEXT.         61 

2.  Under  the  statutes  of  Maryland,  now  the  law  of 
the  District,  the  Governor,  and,  of  course,  the  President, 
may  remit  "  the  whole  or  any  part  of  any  fine,"  without 
exception. 

3.  Under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and 
according  to  its  true  spirit,  the  pardoning  power  of  the 
President  is  coextensive  with  the  power  to  punish,  ex- 
cept in  the  solitary  case  of  impeachment. 

Several  courses  are  open  to  the  President  in  the  pres- 
ent case. 

I.  By  a  genffral  pardon  he  may  discharge  Drayton 
and  Sayres  froni  prison,  and  remit  all  the  fines  and  easts 
/or  which  theif  are  detained.  Such  a  pardon  would 
unquestionably  operate  effectually  upon  the  imprison- 
ment and  upon  the  costs,  and  also  upon  the  half  of  the 
fines  due  to  the  county.  It  would  be  for  the  courts,  on 
a  proper  application,  and  in  the  exereise  of  their  just 
powers,  to  restrict  it,  if  the  pardon  did  not  operate  upon 
the  other  moiety. 

Among  the  opinions  of  the  Attorney-General  is  a 
case  which  illustrates  this  point  In  1824  Joshua 
Wingate  prayed  for  a  credit,  in  the  settlement  of  his 
accounts,  for  his  proportion  of  a  fine  incurred  by  one 
Phineas  Vamey.  It  appeared  that  suit  was  instituted 
by  the  petitioner  as  Collector  of  the  District  of  Bath, 
Maine,  on  which  judgment  was  obtained  in  May,  1809  ; 
the  defendant  was  arrested  and  committed  to  jad,  under 
execution  on  that  judgment,  and  the  fine  was  afterwards 
remitted  by  the  President.  The  petitioner  contended 
that  the  President  had  no  constitutional  or  legal  power 
to  remit  his  proportion  of  the  fine,  tlie  right  to  which 
had  vested  by  the  institution  of  the  suit     On  tliis  Mr, 


■cibyGoogIc 


62         THE  PARDONING  POWER  OF  THE  PRESIDENT. 

"Wirt  remarks,  that  "it  ia  unnecessary  to  express  an 
opinion  npon  the  correctness  of  this  position,  hecause, 
if  it  be  correct,  the  act  of  remission  hj  the  President 
being  wholly  inoperative  as  to  that  portion  of  the  fine 
claimed  by  the  collector,  his  legal  right  to  recover  it 
remained  in  full  force,  notwithstanding  the  remission; 
and  it  is  his  own  fault,  if  he  has  not  enforced  his  right 
at  law."  (Opinions  of  the  Attorneys-General,  Vol.  I.  p. 
479.) 

A  general  pardon  cannot  conclude  the  question  so 
aa  to  divest  any  existing  rights.  It  can  do  no  wrong. 
Why  should  the  President  hesitate  to  exercise  it  ? 

II.  By  a  limited  pardon  the  President  may  discharge 
Drayton  and  Sayres  simply  and  exclusively  from  i/ieir 
irn/prisomnmi,  without  touching  their  pecuniary  liability, 
but  leaving  them  stiU  exposed  to  proceedings  for  all 
fines  and  costs,  to  be  satisfied  out  of  any  property  they 
may  hereafter  acquire. 

If  the  imprisonment  were  a  specific  part  of  the  sen- 
tence,—  as,  if  they  had  been  sentenced  to  one  year's  im- 
prisonment and  a  fine  of  one  hundred  dollars,  —  beyond 
aU  question  they  might  be  dischai^ed,  by  pai-don,  from 
this  imprisonment.  But  where  the  imprisonment,  as  in 
the  present  case,  is  not  a  specific  part  of  the  sentence, 
but  simply  an  alternative  in  the  nature  of  a  remedy, 
to  secure  the  payment  of  the  fine,  the  power  of  tlie 
President  cannot  be  less  than  in  the  former  case. 

So  far  as  all  private  parties  are  concerned,  the  im- 
prisonment ia  a  mere  matter  of  r&nedy,  which  can  be 
dischai^ed  without  divesting  the  beneficiaries  of  any 
r^hts ;  and  since  imprisonment  for  debt  has  been  abol- 
ished, it  is  reasonable,  under  tlie  circumstances,  that  this 
peculiar  remedy  sliould  be  disehai^ed. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE   rAKDONISG   POWER   OF   THE   PKESIDENT.  63 

III.  By  another  form  of  limited  pardon,  the  Presi- 
dent may  disciiorge  Drayton  and  Sayres  from  their  im- 
prisonment, also  from,  ail  fines  mid  costs  in  whdeh  the 
United  States  ham  an  interest,  without  touching  the 
rights  of  other  parties. 

This  would  set  them  at  liberty,  but  would  leave  them 
1  to  private  proceedings  at  the  instigation  of  the 
i  of  the  "transported"  slaves,  if  any  should  be  so 


/  still  another  form  of  pardon,  reference  may 
be  made  to  the  Maryland  statute  of  1782,  under  -which 
the  Governor  is  authorized  "  to  remit  the  whole  or  any 
part  of  any  iine,"  without  any  exception  therefrom  ;  and 
this  power,  now  vested  in  the  President,  may  be  made 
the  express  ground  for  the  remission  of  all  fines  and 
costs  due  from  Drayton  and  Sayi-es.  By  this  form  of 
pardon  the  case  may  be  hmited,  as  a  precedent  here- 
after, to  a  very  narrow  circle  of  cases.  It  would  not  in 
any  way  affect  cases  arising  under  the  general  laws  of 
the  Union. 

In  either  of  these  alternatives  the  great  object  of  this 
application  would  be  gained,  —  the  discharge  of  these 
men  from  prison. 

Charles  Sumner. 

May  li,  1852. 


■cibyGoogIc 


PKESBMTATION  OP  A  lEIOKIAL  AGAINST  THE 
FUGITIVE  SLAVE  BILL 


E  Skkatb,,  May  26,  1852, 


In  the  Senate,  Wedaeaday,  2Sth  May,  1852,  on  the  presentation 
of  a  Memorial  against  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  the  following  passage 
oi!e\in-ed,  which  illostrates  the  sensitiveness  of  the  Senate  with  regard 
to  Slnveiy  and  the  impedimenta  to  its  discnesion.   Mr.  Smnner  soid  ;  — 

ME.  PEESIDENT,— I  hold  in  my  hand,  and  desire 
to  present,  a  memorial  from  the  representatives  of 
the  Society  of  Friends  in  New  England,  formally  adopt- 
ed at  a  public  meeting,  and  authenticated  by  their  clerk, 
in  which  they  ask  for  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave 
BUI.  After  setting,  forth  their  sentiments  on  the  gen- 
eral subject  of  Slavery,  the  memorialists  proceed  as  fol- 
lows. 

"  We,  therefore,  respectfully,  but  earnestly  and  sincerely, 
entreat  you  to  repeal  the  law  of  the  last  Congress  respecting 
fugitive  slaves  :  first  and  principally,  becai^e  of  its  injustice 
towards  a  long  sorely  oppressed  and  deeply  iujured  people  ; 
and,  secondly,  in  order  that  we,  together  with  other  con- 
scientious sufferers,  may  be  exempted  from  the  penalties 
which  it  impMes  on  all  who,  in  faithfulness  to  their  Divine 
Master,  and  in  dischai^  of  their  obligations  to  their  dis- 
tressed fellow-men,  feel  bomid  to  regulate  their  conduct,  even 
under  the  heaviest  penalties  which  man  can  inflict  for  so 
doing,  by  the  divine  iujuuctiou,  '  All  things  whatsoever  ye 


■cibyGoogIc 


MEMORIAL  AGAINST  TUB  FOGITIVE  SLAVE  BILL.        65 

would  that  men  should  do  to  yon,  do  je  even  so  to  them,' 
aiid  by  the  other  commandment,  '  Thou  shalt  lovo  the  Loi-d 
thy  God  with  all  thy  heart,  and  thy  neighbor  as  thyself.'  " 

Mr.  President, — This  memorial  is  commended  by  the 
character  of  the  religious  association  from  which  it  pro- 
ceeds, —  men  who  mingle  rarely  in  puWic  affairs,  but 
with  austere  virtue  seek  to  carry  the  Cliristian  rule  into 
life. 

The  Pkksidhdt  [Mr.  Kiku,  of  Alabama].  The  C'lair  will 
have  to  interpose.  The  Senator  is  not  privileged  to  enter 
into  a  discussion  of  the  suliject  now.  The  contents  of  the 
memorial,  simply,  are  to  be  stated,  and  then  it  becomes  a 
question  whether  it  is  to  be  received,  if  any  objection  is 
made  to  its  reception.  Silence  gives  consent  After  it  ia 
received,  he  can  make  a  motion  with  regard  to  its  reference, 
find  then  make  any  remarks  he  thinks  proper. 

Mr.  SuMSER.  I  have  but  few  words  to  add,  and  then  I 
propose  to  move  the  reference  of  the  memorial  to  the  Com- 
mittflo  on  the  Judiciary. 

The  PiiBSiDEKT.  The  memorial  has  first  to  be  received, 
before  any  motion  as  to  its  reference  can  be  entertained. 
The  Senator  presenting  a  memorial  states  distinctly  its  ob- 
jects and  contents ;  then  it  is  sent  to  the  Chair,  if  a  reference 
of  it  ia  desired.  But  it  is  not  in  order  to  enter  into  a  dis- 
cussion of  the  merits  of  the  memorial  until  it  has  been  re- 
cen  ed  ^ 

Mb.  tiUMNER.  I  do  not  propose  to  enter  into  any  such 
discussion.  I  have  already  read  one  part  of  the  mcmoB^al, 
and  it  wis  my  design  merely  to  refer  to  the  character  of  the 
memorialists,  —  a  usage  wbich  I  have  observed  on  this  floor- 
constdutly  — and  to  state  the  course  I  should  pursue,  con- 
cludmg  with  a  motion  for  a  reference. 

1  On  any  Eubjaot  bat  Slavery  there  wae  no  check  upon  Senators  nt  niiy 


■cibyGoogIc 


bo  PKESESTATlON   OP  A  MEMORIAL 

T;iE  PRBaiDEKT.  The  Chair  will  hear  the  Senatoi-,  if  such 
ia  the  pleasure  of  the  Senate,  if  he  does  not  go  into  an  elab- 
orate discussion. 

Me.  Summer.     I  have  no  such  purpose. 

Mb.  Dawson  [of  Geoigia].    Let  him  be  heard. 

Several  Senators.     Certainly. 

Me.  Sumnek.  I  observed  that  tliis  memorial  was 
commended  by  the  character  of  the  religious  association 
from  which  it  proceeds.  It  ia  commended  also  by  its 
earnest  and  persuasive  tone,  and  by  the  prayer  which  it 
presents.  Offering  it  now.  Sir,  I  desire  simply  to  say, 
that  I  shall  deem  it  my  duty,  on  some  proper  occasion 
hereafter,  to  express  myself  at  length  on  the  matter  to 
which  it  relates.  Thus  far,  during  this  session,  I  have 
forborne.  With  the  exception  of  an  able  speech  from 
my  colleague  [Mr.  Davis],  the  discussion  of  this  all^ 
absorbing  question  has  been  mainly  left  with  Senators 
from  another  quarter  of  the  country,  hy  whose  mutual 
differences  it  is  complicated,  and  between  whom  I  do 
not  care  to  interfere.  But  thei-e  is  a  time  for  all  things. 
Justice  also  requires  that  both  sides  should  be  heard ; 
and  I  trust  not  to  expect  too  much,  when,  at  some  fit 
moment,  I  beapeali  the  clear  and  candid  attention  of 
the  Senate,  while  I  undertake  to  set  forth,  frankly  and 
fully,  and  with  entire  respect  for  this  body,  convictions 
deeply  cherished  in  my  own  State,  though  disregarded 
here,  to  which  I  am  bound  by  every  sentiment  of  the 
heart,  by  every  fibre  of  my  being,  by  all  my  devotion  to 
.  country,  by  my  love  of  God  and  man.  Upon  these  I 
do  not  enter  now.  Suffice  it,  for  the  present,  to  say, 
that,  when  I  undertake  that  sernce,  I  behove  I  shall 
utter  nothing  which,  in  any  just  sense,  can  be  called 
sectional,  unless  the  Constitution  is  sectional,  and  unless 


■cibyGoogIc 


AGAIKST   THE   FUGITIVE    SLAVE   BILL.  67 

the  sentiments  of  the  Fathers  wore  sectional  It  is  my 
happiness  to  believe,  and  my  hope  to  be  able  to  show, 
that,  accordiog  to  the  true  spirit  of  the  Constitution, 
and  according  to  the  sentiments  of  the  Fathers,  Fkee- 
DOM,  and  not  Slavery,  is  national,  while  Slavery,  and 
not  Freedom,  is  sectional. 

In  duty  to  the  petitioners,  and  with  the  hope  of  pro- 
moting tlieir  prayer,  I  move  the  reference  of  their  peti- 
tion to  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary. 

A  brief  debate  enened,  in  which  Meesrs.  Mangum,  of  Forth  Carolina, 
Badger,  of  North  Carolina,  Hale,  of  New  Hampehire,  Clemens,  of  Ala- 
bama, Dawson,  of  Georgia,  Adams,  of  Mieeiasippi,  Butler,  of  South 
CaiTilma,  and  Chase,  of  Ohio,  took  part ;  and,  on  motian  of  Mr.  Badg- 
er, the  memorial  was  laid  ou  tlie  table. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  NATIONAL  FLAG  THE  EMBLEM  OF  UNION 
FOR  FREEDOM. 


"Washisotok,  July  2,  1852. 

DEAR  SIR,  —  It  will  not  be  in  my  power  to  m^ite 
■with  my  fellow-citizena  of  Boston  in  celebrating 
die  approaching  anniversary  of  our  national  independ- 
ence, I  venture,  however,  in  response  to  the  invitation 
with  which  I  have  been  honored,  to  recall  an  incident 
not  nnworthy  of  remembrance,  especially  in  our  local 
liistory. 

The  thirteen  stripes  which  now  distinguish  our  na- 
tional flag  were  first  unfurled  by  Wasliington,  when 
in  command  of  tlie  American  forces  which  surrounded 
Boston,  after  the  Battle  of  Bunker  Hill,  and  before  the 
Declaration  of  Independence.  Thus  early  was  this  em- 
blem of  Union  consecrated  to  freedom.  Our  great  chief 
at  once  gave  to  the  new  ensign  a  name  which  may  apeak 
to  US  still.  In  a  letter,  wiitten  at  the  time,  he  calls  it 
the  Union  Flag,  and  declares  why  it  was  first  displayed. 
His  language  is,  that  he  had  "Twisted  the  UKION  flag  m 
eomplinicnt  to  the  united  Colonies''^  Afterwards,  on  the 
14th  of  June,  1777,  by  a  resolution  of  the  Continental 

1  Letter  to  Joseph  Eeed,  Jan.  4,  1776:  Writings,  ed.  Spai-ks,  Vol.  UL 


■cibyGoogIc 


OUR  FLAG  THE  EMBLEM  OF  UiNION  FOE  FllEEDOM.       69 

Congress,  the  stars  and  stripes  were  formally  adopted 
as  the  flag  of  the  United  Slates. 

This  piece  of  history  suggests  a  aenfcimeut  which  I 
teg  leave  to  offer. 

Our  national  Flag,  Firat  hoisted  before  Boaton,  as  the 
emblem  of  Union  for  the  sake  of  Freedom,  Wherever  it 
floats,  may  it  never  fail  to  inspire  the  sentiments  in  which  it 
had  its  origin ! 

I  have  the  honor  to  be,  dear  Sir, 

Tour  faitliful  servant, 

Charles  Sumnek. 
Hon,  BE^•JAH1N  Seavee,  Chairmaa  of  the  Committee,  &c,,  &o. 


■cibyGoogIc 


nmOH  AfiAINSP  THE  SECTIOSAIISI  OF  SUVEKY. 

Letter  to  a  Fhee-Soil  Convention  at  Worcesteh, 
July  6,  1852. 


This  Convention  was  orgajiized  with,  the  foUowii^  officers ;  Hon. 
Stephen  C.  Phillips,  of  Salem,  President,  — William  Davis,  of  Plym- 
outl,  Oershom  B.  Weston,  of  Duxhniy,  Edward  L.  Keyes,  of  Dedliam, 
"WilUom  B.  Spooner,  of  Boston,  John  G,  Palf^y,  of  Cambridge,  Joliu 
B.  Alley,  ot  Lynn,  Samuel  E.  Sewall,  of  Stoneham,  John  W.  Graves, 
of  Lowell,  Jolin  Milton  Eavle,  of  Woroeater,  William  Jackson,  of  New- 
ton, Eodolphos  B.  Hohliard,  of  Sunderland,  Caleb  Swan,  of  Easton, 
Joel  Hayden,  of  Williamabaig,  William  M.  Walker,  of  Pittsfield,  Vice- 
Presidents,— EobertCartfir,  of  Cambridge,  Geoi'ge  F.  Hoar,  of  Worces- 
ter, S.  B.  Howe,  of  LoweB,  Andrew  J.  Aiken,  of  Hoith  Adams,  8.  L. 
Gere,  of  Northampton,  Secretaries. 

The  resolutions  were  reported  by  Hon.  Henry  Wilson. 

Washington  City,  July  3,  1853. 

DEAE  8IE,— -The  tnie  and  well-tried  friends  of 
Preedom  in  Massachusetts  are  ahout  to  assemble 
at  Worcester.  It  will  not  he  in  my  power  to  be  witli 
them,  to  catch  the  contagion  of  their  enthusiasm,  to 
be  strengthened  by  their  determination,  and  to  learn 
anew  from  eloquent  lips  the  grandeur  of  our  cause  and 
the  exigency  of  our  duties.  But  I  confidently  look 
to  them  for  trumpet  words  which  shall  ^ain  rally  the 
country  against  the  sectionalism  of  Slavery, 

At  Worcester,  in  1848,  commenced  the  first  strong 
movement,  which,  gaining  new  force  at  Buffalo,  and 
sweeping  the  Free  States,  enrolled  three  hundred  thou- 


■cibyGooglc 


UNION  AGAINST  THE  SECTIONAUSM  OF  SLAVEEY.       71 

sand  electors  in  constitutional  opposition  to  a  hateful 
wrong.  The  occasion  now  requires  a  similaT  effoit. 
Both  the  old  parties,  with  apostasy  gi'cater  than  that 
which  aroused  our  condemnation  at  that  time,  have 
trampled  on  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  and  the 
most  cherished  sentiments  of  the  Fathers  of  the  Ee- 
public.  Even  liberty  of  speech  is  threatened.  It  is 
difficult  to  see  how  any  person,  loyal  to  Freedom,  and 
desirous  of  guarding  it  by  all  constitutional  means,  can 
support  the  national  candidates  of  either  of  these  par- 
ties, without  surrendering  the  cause  he  professes  to  have 
at  heart.  Let  no  man  expect  from  me  any  such  sur- 
render. 

The  two  Conventions  at  Baltimore,  by  their  recorded 
resolutions,  have  vied  with  each  other  in  servility  to 
Slavery,  But  I  rejoice  to  believe  that  in  both  parties 
there  are  lai^e  numbei's  of  good  men  who  wiU  scorn 
these  professions.  The  respectable  persistence  in  op- 
position to  the  Black  Flag,  whicli  distinguished  at  least 
one  of  the  Conventions,  furnishes  an  earnest  for  the 
future,  though  Massachusetts  can  derive  sinaU  encour- 
agement from  her  delegates  there.  All  her  votes  in  that 
Convention  were  cast  in  favor  of  those  declarations  by 
which  Slavery  has  received  new  safeguards  and  Free- 
dom new  restrictions. 

But  these  efforts  are  doomed  to  disappointment.  In 
spite  of  the  clamors  of  partisans  and  the  assumptions 
of  the  Slave  Power,  there  is  one  priuciple  which  must 
soon  prevail  It  cannot  be  too  often  declared ;  for  it 
is  an  all-sufficient  basis  for  our  political  position,  and 
an  answer  also  to  the  cry  of  "  Sectionalism,"  by  which 
the  prejudices  of  the  country  are  ignorantly  and  il- 
logieally  directed  gainst  us.     According  to  the  true 


■cibyGoogIc 


72       ONION  AGAINST  THE  SECTIONALISM  OF  SLAVEEY. 

spirit  of  the  Constitution  and  the  sentiments  of  the 
Fathers,  Freedom,  and  not  Slavery,  is  national,  -while 
Slavery,  and  not  Freedom,  is  sectional  Though  this 
proposition  commends  itself  at  once,  and  is  sustained 
hy  the  history  of  the  Constitution,  yet  hoth  the  great 
parties,  under  the  influence  of  the  Slave  Power,  have 
reversed  the  trae  application  of  its  terms.  A  national 
■Whig  is  simply  a  Slavery  Whig,  and  a  National  Demo- 
crat is  simply  a  Slavery  Democrat,  in  contradistinction 
to  all  who  regard  Slavery  as  a  sectional  institution,  with- 
in the  exclusive  control  of  the  States,  and  with  which 
the  Nation  has  notliing  to  do.  In  upholding  Freedom 
everywhere  under  the  National  Government,  we  oppose 
a  pernicious  sectionalisni,  which  falsely  calls  itself  jut- 
timal.    AH  this  will  yet  be  seen  and  acknowle<^ed. 

Amidst  the  diffieulties  and  defections  at  the  present 
moment,  the  Future  is  clear.  Nothing  can  permanently 
ohstnict  Truth.  But  our  duties  increase  with  the  oc- 
casion ;  nor  will  the  generous  soul,  be  deterred  by  the 
greatness  of  the  peril.  Any  such  will  be  content  to 
sei-ve  Freedom,  to  support  her  supporters,  and  to  leave 
the  result  to  Providence.  Bettei-  be  where  Freedom  is, 
though  in  a  small  minority  or  alone,  than  with  Slavery, 
though  sun-ounded  by  multitudes,  whether  Whigs  or 
Democrats,  contending  merely  for  otfice  and  place. 
Eeheve  me,  dear  Sir,  ever  faithfully  yours, 

Charlbs  Sumner. 
Hon.  E.  L.  Keyes. 


■cibyGoogIc 


"STIIKE,  BUT  EEAE":  ATTHPT  TO  DISCM  THE 
FUGITIVE  SUYE  BILL. 

w  THE  Senate,  on  taiung  up  the  Resolution 

OOUMITTEE  OK  TOE  JdDIOIAHT  TO  REPORT  A  BiLL 

Eepeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slate  Act,  July  27 


MR.  PRESIDENT,  — I  have  a  resolution  ^vhich  I 
desire  to  offer ;  and  as  it  is  not  in  order  to  de- 
bate it  to-day,  I  give  notice  tliat  I  shall  expect  to  call 
it  up  to-morrow,  at  an  early  moment  in  the  morning 
hour,  when  I  shall  throw  myself  upon  the  indulgence 
of  the  Senate  to  he  heard  upon  it. 

The  resolntion  was  then  read,  hs  follows :  — 

"Resolved,  That  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary  be  in- 
structed to  consider  the  expediency  of  reporting  a  bill  for  the 
immediate  repeal  of  the  Act  of  Congress,  approved  Septem- 
ber 18,  1850,  usually  known  as  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act." 

In  pursuance  of  this  notice,  on  the  next  day,  28th  July,  during  the 
morning  hour,  an  attempt  was  mnde  hy  Mr.  Sumner  to  call  it  np,  that 
he  might  present  hia  views  on  Slaveiy. 

Mk.  Peesident,  —  I  now  ast  permission  of  the  Senate 
to  take  up  the  resolution  which  I  offered  yesterday. 
For  that  purpose,  I  move  that  the  prior  orders  he  post- 
poned, and  upon  this  motion  I  desire  to  say  a  word. 
In  asking  the  ^Senate  to  tstke  up  this  resolution  for 
consideration,  I  say  nothing  now  of  its  merits,  nor  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


74        ATTEMPT  TO  UISCUSS  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  BILL. 

the  arguments  by  which  it  may  be  mamtained ;  nor  do 
I  at  this  stage  anticipate  any  objection  to  it  on  these 
grounds.  AH  this  will  properly  belong  to  the  discus- 
sion of  the  resolution  itself,  —  the  main  question,— 
when  it  is  actually  before  the  Senate.  The  single  ques- 
tion now  is,  not  the  resolution,  but  whether  I  shall  be 
heard  npon  it. 

As  a  Senator,  under  the  responsiblHties  of  my  posi- 
tion, I  have  deemed  it  my  duty  to  offer  this  resolution. 
I  may  seem  to  have  postponed  this  duty  to  an  incon- 
venient period  of  the  session ;  hut  had  I  attempted  it  at 
an  earlier  day,  I  might  have  exposed  myself  to  a  charge 
of  a  different  character.  It  might  then  have  been  said, 
that,  a  new-comer  and  inexperienced  in  this  scene,  with- 
out deliberation,  hastily,  rashly,  recklessly,  I  pushed 
this  question  before  the  country.  This  is  not  the  case 
now.  I  have  taken  time,  and,  in  the  exercise  of  my 
most  careful  discretion,  at  last  ask  the  attention  of  the 
Senate.  I  shrink  from  any  appeal  founded  on  a  trivial 
personal  consideration;  but  should  I  be  blamed  for 
delay  latterly,  I  may  add,  that,  though  in  my  seat  daily, 
my  bodily  health  for  some  time  past,  down  to  this  very 
week,  has  not  been  equal  to  the  service  I  have  un- 
dertaken. I  am  not  sure  tiiat  it  is  now,  but  I  desire 
to  try. 

And  now  again  I  say,  the  question  is  simply  wheth- 
er I  shall  he  heard.  In  allowing  me  this  privilege,— 
this  right,  I  may  say,  — you  do  not  commit  yourselves 
in  any  way  to  the  principle  of  the  resolution ;  you 
merely  foUow  the  ordinary  usage  of  the  Senate,  and 
yield  to  a  brother  Senator  the  opportunity  which  he 
craves,  in  the  practical  dischai^e  of  his  duty,  to  express 
convictions  deaf  to  his  heart,  and  dear  to  lai^e  numbers 


■cibyGoogIc 


ATTEMPT  TO  DISCUSS  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  BILL.       ,75 

of  his  conatituenta.  For  the  sake  of  these  constitiienta, 
for  my  own  sake,  I  now  desire  to  he  heard.  Make  such 
disposition  of  my  resolution  afterward  aa  to  you  shall 
seem  hest ;  visit  upon  me  any  degree  of  criticism,  cen- 
sure, or  displeasure;  hut  do  not  refuse  me  a  hearing. 
"  Strike,  but  hear," 

A  debate  ensaed,  in  which  Messrs.  Maaon,  of  Virginia,  Brooke,  of 
Mississippi,  Charlton,  of  Georgia,  Owin,  of  California,  Pratt,  of  Mary- 
land, Shields,  of  Illinois,  Douglas,  of  lUiuois,  Butler,  of  South  Caro- 
lina, Borland,  of  Arkansas,  and  Hunter,  of  Virginia,  took  part.  Ob- 
jections to  taking  up  the  resolution  were  pressed  on  the  ground  of 
"want  of  time,"  "the  lateness  of  the  session,"  and  "danger  to  the 

The  question  being  put  upon  the  motion  by  Mr.  Sumner  to  take  up 
his  resolution,  it  was  rejected,  — Yeas  10,  Fays  32,  — as  foDows. 

Yeas,  —  Messrs,  Clarke,  Davis,  Dodge,  of  Wisconsin,  Poot,  Ham- 
Lin,  Sewai'd,  Shields,  Sumner,  Upham,  and  Wade :  — 10. 

Fays,  —  Messrs.  Borland,  Bradhead,  Brooke,  Cass,  Charlton,  Clem- 
ens, Do  Saussure,  Dodge,  of  Iowa,  Douglas,  Downs,  Felch,  Fish, 
Geyer,  Gwin,  Hunter,  King,  Mallory,  Mangum,  Mason,  Meriwether, 
Miller,  Moitan,  Norris,  Pearee,  Pratt,  Rusk,  Sehostian,  Smith,  Soule, 
Spruance,  Toucey,  and  Weller ;  —  32. 

Mr.  Sumner  was  thus  deprived  of  an  opportunity  to  present  his  views 
on  this  important  subject,  and  it  Wiis  openly  asserted  that  he  should 
not  iiresent  them  during  the  pending  session.  Such  was  the  pro-slav- 
ery tyranny  which  prevaOed.  He  was  thus  driven  to  watch  for  an 
opportunity,  when,  according  to  the  rules  of  the  Senate,  he  might  be 
hpiid  without  uapediment.     On  one  of  the  hist  days  of  the  session  it 


■cibyGoogIc 


TEIBUW  TO  EOBEET  EAKTODl,  Jr. 

Speech  is  tef.  Sen  at 


A  MESSA8E  waa  receiTed  from  the  Honae  of  Representatives,  by  Mr. 
Hayes,  its  Chief  Clerk,  comnraDicatiiig  to  the  Senate  information  of 
the  death  of  the  Hon.  Robert  Rantoui,  Jk.,  a  member  of  the  House 
of  RepresentaliTes  front  the  State  of  Mflssaehusetts,  and  the  proceed- 
ings of  the  House  thereon. 

The  resolutions  of  the  House  of  Eepreaentatives  were  read.  Jlr. 
Sumner  said :  — 

MK.  PRESIDENT,  —  By  formal  message  of  the 
House  of  Eepresentatives  we  learn  that  one  of 
our  associates  in  the  public  councils  is  dead.  Only  a 
few  brief  days  —  I  had  almost  said  hours  —  have  passed 
since  he  was  in  his  accustomed  seat.  Now  he  is  gone 
from  us  forever.  He  was  my  colleague  and  friend ; 
and  yet,  so  sudden  has  been  this  change,  that  no  tid- 
ings even  of  his  illness  came  to  me  before  I  learned 
that  be  was  already  beyond  the  reach  of  mortal  aid  or 
consolation,  and  that  the  shadows  of  the  grave  were 
descending  upon  him.  He  died  here  in  Washington, 
late  on  Saturday  evenii^,  7th  August ;  and  his  earthly 
remains,  accompanied  by  the  bereaved  companion  of  his 
life,  with  a  Committee  of  the  other  House,  are  now  far 
on  the  way  to  Massachusetts,  there  to  mingle,  dust  to 
dust,  with  liis  natal  soil. 


■cibyGoogIc 


TRIBUTE   TO   EGBERT   EANTOUL,  JR.  77 

The  occasion  does  nob  pennit  me  to  speak  of  Mr, 
Eantoul  at  length.  A  few  words  will  suffice ;  nor  will 
the  language  of  eulogy  be  req^uired. 

He  was  born  13th  August,  1805,  at  Beverly,  in  Essex 
Coiuity,  Massachusetts,  the  home  of  Nathan  Dane,  final 
aiithor  of  the  immortal  Ordinance  by  which  Freedom 
was  made  a  perpetual  heirloom  in  the  broad  region  of 
the  Northwest.  Here  he  commenced  life  under  happy 
auspices  of  family  and  neighborhood.  Here  his  excel- 
lent father,  honored  for  public  services,  venerable  also 
with  years  and  flowing  silver  locks,  yet  lives  to  mourn 
a  last  surviving  son.  The  sad  fortune  of  Biurke  is  re- 
newed. He  who  should  have  been  a 
this  father  in  the  place  of  ancestor. 

Mr.  Eantoul  entered  the.  Massachusetts  Legislature 
early,  and  there  won  his  first  fame.  For  many  years 
he  occupied  a  plaee  on  the  Board  of  Education.  He  was 
also,  for  a  time,  Collector  of  Boston,  and  afterwards  At- 
torney of  the  United  States  for  Massachusetts,  Dur- 
ing a  brief  period  he  held  a  seat  in  this  body.  Finally, 
in  1851,  by  the  choice  of  his  native  District,  remark- 
able for  intelligence  and  public  spirit,  he  became  a 
Representative  in  the  other  branch  of  Wie  National  Le- 
gislature. In  all  these  spheres  he  performed  accepta- 
ble service.  And  the  future  promised  opportunities  of 
a  h^her  character,  to  which  his  abilities,  industry,  and 
fidelity  would  have  responded  amply,  Massachusetts 
has  many  aiTows  in  her  well-stocked  quiver,  but  few 
could  she  so  ill  spare  at  this  moment  as  the  one  now 
irrevocably  sped. 

By  original  fitness,  study,  knowledge,  and  various  ex- 
perience, he  was  formed  for  public  service.  But  he  was 
no  stranger  to  other  pursuits.     Devoted  early  to  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


78  TEIEUTE   TO    ROBERT   EAKTOUL,  JE. 

profession  of  the  law,  he  followed  it  with  assiduity  and 
success.  In  the  antiquities  of  our  jurisprudence  few 
were  more  learned.  His  arguments  at  the  bar  were 
thorough ;  nor  was  his  intellectual  promptness  in  all 
emei^ncies  of  a  trial  easily  surpassed.  Literature,  neg- 
lected by  many  under  pressure  of  professional  life,  was 
with  him  a  constant  pursuit.  His  taste  for  books  was 
enduring.  He  was  a  student  always.  Amidst  manifold 
labors,  professional  and  public,  he  cherished  the  honor- 
able aspiration  of  adding  to  the  historical  productions 
of  his  countiy.  A  work  on  the  history  of  France,  where 
this  great  nation  should  be  poitrayed  by  an  American 
pen,  occupied  much  of  his  thoughts.  I  know  not  if  any 
part  was  ever  matured  for  publication. 

The  practice  of  the  law,  while  sharpening  the  intel- 
lect, is  too  apt  to  cramp  the  faculties  within  the  narrow 
limits  of  form,  and  to  restrain  the  genial  currents  of  the 
soul.  On  him  it  had  no  such  intiuence.  He  was  a  Re- 
former. In  waifare  with  Evil  he  was  enlisted  early 
and  openly  as  a  soldier  for  life.  As  such,  he  did  not 
hesitate  to  encounter  opposition,  to  bear  obloquy,  and  to 
.brave  enmity.  His  conscience,  pure  as  goodness,  sus- 
tained him  in  every  trial,  —  even  that  sharpest  of  all, 
the  desertion  of  friends.  And  yet,  while  earnest  in  his 
cause,  his  zeal  was  tempered  beyond  that  of  the  common 
reformer.  He  knew  well  the  difference  between  the 
ideal  and  the  actual,  and  sought,  by  practical  means,  in 
harmony  with  existing  public  sentiment,  to  promote  the 
interests  he  fondly  cheilshed.  He  saw  that  reform  does 
not  prevail  at  once,  in  an  hour,  or  in  a  day,  but  that  it 
is  the  slow  and  certeiin  result  of  constant  labor,  testi- 
mony, and  faith.  Determined  and  tranquil  in  his  own 
convictions,  he  had  the  gi'ace  to  respect  the  convictions 


■cibyGoogIc 


TRIBUTE   TO   EGBERT   EANTOUL,   JE.  79 

of  others.  Itecognizing  in  the  social  and  political  sys- 
tem those  essential  elements  of  stability  and  progi'ess, 
he  discerned  at  once  the  offices  of  Conservative  and 
Eeformer.  But  he  saw  also  that  a  blind  conservatism 
was  not  less  destructive  than  a  blind  reform.  By  min- 
gled caution,  moderation,  and  earnestness,  he  seemed 
often  to  blend  two  chai'acters  in  one,  and  to  be  at  the 
same  time  a  Reforming  Consereaiive  and  a  Conservative 
Eeformer. 

I  might  speak  of  his  devotion  to  public  improvements 
of  all  kinds,  particulaiiy  to  the  system  of  Eailroads. 
Here  lie  was  on  the  popular  side.  There  were  other 
causes  where  his  straggle  was  keener  and  more  merito- 
rious. At  a  moment  when  his  services  were  much  need- 
ed, he  was  the  faithful  supporter  of  Common  Schools, 
the  pecuhar  gloiy  of  N^ew  England.  By  word  and  ex- 
ample he  sustained  the  cause  of  Temperance.  Some  of 
his  most  devoted  labors,  commencing  in  the  Legislature 
of  Massachusetts,  were  for  the  Abohtion  of  Capital  Pun- 
ishment. Since  that  coiisvunmate  jurist,  Edwai'd  Liv- 
ingston, no  person  has  done  so  much,  by  reports,  essays, 
letters,  and  speeches,  to  commend  this  reform.  With  it« 
iinal  triumph,  in  the  progress  of  civilization,  his  name 
will  be  indissolubly  connected.  Tliere  is  another  cause 
that  commanded  his  early  sympathies  and  some  of  his 
latest  best  endeavor's,  to  which,  had  life  been  spared,  he 
would  have  given  the  splendid  maturity  of  his  powers. 
Posterity  cannot  foi^t  this ;  hut  I  am  forbidden  by  the 
occasion  to  name  it  here.  Sir,  in  the  long  line  of  por- 
traits on  the  walls  of  the  Ducal  Palace  at  Venice,  com- 
memorating its  Doges,  a  single  panel,  where  a  portrait 
should  have  been,  is  shrouded  by  a  dark  curtain  But 
this  darkened  blank,  in  that  place,  attracts  the  beholder 


■cibyGoogIc 


80  TKIBUTE   TO    iiOBEKT    KAKTOUL,   JK. 

more  than  any  picture.  Let  such  a  curtain  fall  to-day 
upon  this  theme.^ 

In  becoming  harmony  with  these  noble  causes  was  the 
purity  of  his  private  lii'e.  Here  he  was  blameless.  In 
maimers  he  was  modest,  simple,  and  retiring.  In  eon- 
veisation  lie  was  disposed  to  listen  mther  than  to  speak, 
though  all  were  weU  pleased  when  he  broke  silence 
and  in  apt  language  declared  his  glowing  thought.  But 
in  the  public  assembly,  before  the  people,  or  in  the  legis- 
lative hall,  lie  was  bold  and  triuinphant.  As  a  debater 
he  rarely  met  his  peer.  Fluent,  earnest,  rapid,  sharp, 
incisive,  his  words  came  fortli  like  a  flashing  scymitar. 
Few  could  stand  t^inst  him.  He  always  undei'stood 
his  subject,  and  then,  clear,  logical,  and  determined, 
seeing  his  point  before  him,  pressed  forward  with  unre- 
lenting power.  His  speeches  on  formal  occasions  were 
enriclied  by  study,  and  contain  passages  of  beauty.  But 
he  was  most  truly  at  home  in  dealing  with  practical 
q^uestions  arising  from  the  actual  exigencies  of  life. 

Few  had  studied  public  affairs  more  minutely  or  in- 
telligently. As  a  constant  and  effective  member  of  the 
Democratic  party,  he  became  conspicuous  by  champion- 
ship of  its  doctrines  on  the  Curi'eney  and  Fi-ee  Trade. 
These  he  often  discussed,  and  from  the  amplitude  of  his 
knowledge,  and  his  overflowing  familiarity  with  facts, 
statistics,  and  the  principles  of  political  economy,  poured 
upon  tliem  a  luminous  flood.  There  was  no  topic  with- 
in tlie  wide  range  of  national  concern  wliich  did  not 
occupy  his  thoughts.    The  resources  and  needs  of  the 

1  Slavery-  could  not  bear  to  be  pointed  Ht,  nnd  this  slight  allusion,  wliicli 
Eeeni«d  due  to  Die  memory  of  Mr.  RantonI,  caused  irritation  at  tlie  time. 
Hon.  John  Davi!),  the  other  Senator  from  IMaesnchnsetts,  assigned  as  a 
reason  for  silence  on  the  occasion,  that  he  observed  the  ill-feeling  of  certain 
persons,  and  thought  it  beat  tlmt  the  vote  shonid  be  taiien  at  once. 


;db,Googlc 


TRIBUTE  TO  ROBERT   EANTOUL,  JR.  81 

\Yesfc  were  all  known  to  him,  and  "Western  interests 
were  like  his  own.  As  the  pioneer,  resting  from  his 
daily  labors,  learns  the  death  of  Eantoul,  he  will  feel 
a  personal  grie£  The  fisliermen  on  the  distant  Eastern 
coast,  many  of  whom  are  dwellers  in  his  District,  will 
sympathize  with  the  pioneer.  These  hardy  children  of 
the  sea,  returning  in  their  smaU  craft  fi-om  late  adven- 
tures, and  hearing  the  sad  tidings,  will  feel  that  they  too 
have  lost  a  friend.  And  well  they  may.  Duiing  his 
last  fitful  hours  of  life,  while  reason  still  struj^led  against 
disease,  he  was  anxious  for  their  welfai^e.  The  speech 
which  he  liad  hoped  soon  to  make  in  their  behalf  was 
then  chasing  through  his  mind.  Finally,  in  broken  ut- 
terances, he  gave  to  them  his  latest  earthly  thoughts, 

The  death  of  such  a  man,  so  sudden,  in  mid-career,  is 
weU  calculated  to  arrest  attention  and  to  furnish  admoni- 
tion. From  the  love  of  family,  the  attaehment  of  friends, 
and  the  regard  of  fellow-citizens,  he  has  been  removed. 
Leaving  behind  the  cares  of  life,  the  concerns  of  state, 
and  the  WTOtched  strifes  of  party,  he  has  ascended  to 
those  mansions  where  there  is  no  strife  or  concern  or 
care.  At  last  he  stands  face  to  face  in  His  presence 
whose  sei-vice  is  perfect  freedom.  He  has  gone  before. 
You  and  I,  Sir,  and  aU  of  us,  must  follow  soon.  God  grant 
that  we  may  go  with  eq^nal  consciousness  of  duty  done ! 

I  beg  leave  to  offer  the  following  resolutions. 

Resolved,  wnanimouely.  That  tho  Senate  mourns  the  death 
of  Hon.  Robert  RantOul,  Jr.,  late  a  member  of  the  House 
of  Repr^entatiTes  from  Massachusetts,  and  tendei-s  to  his 
relatives  a  sincere  sympathy  in  this  afflicting  bereavement. 

Beeolved,  As  a  remark  of  respect  to  the  memory  of  the 
deceased,  that  the  Senate  do  now  adjourn. 

The  resolutions  were  aUopted,  aiid  tlie  Senate  adjourned. 


;db,Googlc 


82  TRIBUTE  TO   EGBERT  EAKTOUL,  JR. 

TToTE.  — A  monument  of  Italian  marble  was  ei'eeted  to  the  memory 
of  Mr.  Raiitoul  in  tlie  barial-ground  at  Beveily.  It  is  an  upviglit, 
four-sided  shaft,  on  the  front  facB  of  which,  is  the  fcJlowiiig  iiisaiptioji, 
written  by  Mr.  Sumner. 

Here  lies  tlie  body  of 

EGBERT   EANTOUL,   JR., 

Who  was  bom  at  Beverly,  13th  August,  1805, 

and  died  at  Washington,  7th  August,  1852. 

An  upright  lawyer,  a  liberal  statesman,  a  good  citizen, 

studious  of  the  Past,  yet  mindful  of  the  Puture. 

Throughout  an  active  life  lie  strove  for  the 

improvement  of  his  fellow-men. 

The  faithful  friend  of  Education,  he  upheld  oar  Public  Schools. 

A  lover  of  Vii-tue,  he  opposed  Intemperance 

by  word  and  example. 

In  the  name  of  Justice  and  Humantty,  he  labored 

to  abolish  the  punishment  of  Death. 

Inspired  by  Freedom,  he  gave  his  professional  servioea 

to  a  slave  hunted  doivn  by  public  clamor, 

and  bora  his  testimony,  in  Court  and  Congi'ess, 

against  the  cruel  enactment  which  sanctioned  the  outrage. 

He  held  many  places  of  official  trust  and  honor, 

but  the  Good  Works  filling  hia  days  were  above  these. 

Stranger  !  at  least  in  sometliing  imitate  him. 


;db,Googlc 


AUTHORSHIP  OF  THE  ORDINANCE  OF  FREE- 
DOM IK  THE  NORTHWEST  TERRITORY. 

Lftter  to  Hon.  Edwaud  Coles,  August  23,  1852. 


Mr.  Coles  lias  lieen  ptivate  aeeretary  to  Mr.  Jefferson,  and  then  to 
Mr.  Madiaon,  and  afterwards  Gorernor  of  lUinoie.  The  following  ex- 
tract of  a  letter  from  him  to  Mr.  Snmnar,  dated  Schooley's  Mountain, 
Now  Jersey,  August  18,  1862,  I'^es  the  quustion  of  the  authorship  of 
the  Ordinance  of  Freedom. 

"Not  having  the  pleasure  of  a  personal  acquaintance  with  you,  I  BhaM  ask 
the  favor  of  Senator  Cooper  to  present  you  this,  and  to  ranke  me  known  to 
you,  and  thus  explain  the  obhgatlon  you  have  placed  me  under,  ss  the 
friendofMr.Jaffaraon,  to  correct  an  error  you  lately  made  in  the  Senate,  by 
which  you  taks  tVom  him,  and  give  to  another,  one  of  the  noblest  and  most 
couBlstenC  acts  of  ills  life. 

"  In  your  speech  in  the  Senate,  on  the  occasion  of  tho  death  of  Mr.  Ran. 
toul,  you  spoke  of  Nathan  Dane  as  tlie  "  Avlhoi- "  of  the  Ordinance  for  the 
government  of  the  Territory  northwest  of  the  Ohio.  With  my  reooileotloo,  — 
for  I  have  no  book  or  person  to  refer  to  at  tliis  summer  retreat,  —  I  oould  not 
have  boon  more  surprised,  if  you  had  designated  as  the  author  of  the  Daela. 
ration  of  Independence  one  of  the  members  who  added  his  name  to  it  after  it 
had  been  adopted  by  Congress." 

Srnatb  Chamber,  August  33,  1852. 

DEAR  SIR,— I  have  "been  honored  by  your  letter 
of  August  18th,  in  which  you  kindly  criticise  an 
allusion  by  me  in  the  Senate  to  Nathan  Dane,  as  the 
author  of  the  Ordinance  of  1787.  You  award  this  high 
honor  to  Mr.  Jefferson. 

Believe  me,  I  would  not  take  from  this  great  patriot 
one  of  his  many  titles  to  regard.  Among  these,  I  can- 
not forget  the  early,  though  unsuccessful  effort,  to  which 
you  refer,  for  the  prohibition  of  Slavery  in  the  Territo- 


■cibyGooglc 


84  AUTHORSHIP  OS  THE  OEDINANCE  OF    FEEEDOM 

ries  of  the  United  States.  But,  while  accoidiug  to  Iiim 
just  homage  on  this  account,  I  cannot  forget  the  crown- 
ing labors  of  another. 

I  submit  to  you,  as  beyond  c[ue8tion,  that  the  Ordi- 
nance of  IVS'Z,  as  finally  adopted,  was  from  the  pen  of 
Nathan  Dane.  In  his  great  work  on  American  Law, 
published  in  1824,  while  Mr.  Jefferson  was  yet  alive, 
I  find  tlie  following  claim  of  authorship:  "This  ordi- 
nance {formed  iy  tJie  atithor  of  this  wm-k)  was  framed 
mainly  from  the  laws  of  Massachusetts."  ^ 

In  the  celebrated  debate  of  1830,  on  Foot's  Eesolution, 
Mr.  "Webster,  in  his  first  speech,  referred  to  the  Ordi- 
nance as  "  drawn  by  Nathan  Dane."  ^  Afterwards,  in  his 
remarkable  reply  to  Mr.  Hayne,  he  vindicated  at  length 
this  61aim  of  authorship.  While  admitting  the  earlier 
efforts  for  the  prohibition  of  Slavery  in  the  Territories, 
he  says :  "  It  is  no  derogation  from  the  credit,  whatever 
that  may  be,  of  drawing  the  Ordinance,  that  its  princi- 
ples liad  before  been  prepared  and  discussed  in  the  form 
of  resolutions.  If  one  should  reason  in  that  way,  what 
would  become  of  the  distinguished  honor  of  the  author 
of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  ?  There  is  not  a 
sentiment  in  that  paper  which  had  .not  been  voted  and 
resolved  in  the  Assemblies,  and  other  popular  bodies  in 
the  country,  over  and  over  again."  ^ 

Such,  as  it  seems  to  me,  is  the  true  state  of  the  ques- 
tion. To  Jeffereon  belongs  the  honor  of  the  first  effort 
to  pi'ohibit  Slavery  in  the  Territories :  to  Dane  belongs 
the  honor  of  finally  embodying  this  Prohibition  in  the 
Ordinance  drawn  by  his  hand  in  1787. 

1  Abridgment  and  Digest  of  American  Law,  Vol,  VII,  oil.  223,  art.  1,  §3. 

2  Works,  Vol.  111.  p.  263. 
S  Ibid.,  p.  aS3. 


■cibyGoogIc 


IN   THE  NOETHWEST  TEKUITORY.  85 

As  this  question  has  already  been  presented  to  the 
Senate  in  a  cla^ical  debate  memorable  in  the  history 
of  the  country,  it  seems  to  me  liardly  advisable,  at 
this  late  stage  of  tlie  session,  to  undertake  its  revival. 
It  you  should  continue  to  think  that  I  have  made  an 
error,  1  shall  be  happy  to  correct  it  in  any  practicable 
way, 

AHow  me  to  express  my  sincere  respect  for  your  char- 
acter, with  which  from  childhood  I  have  been  familiar, 
and  my  gi-atitude  for  the  steadfast  support  you  have 
ever  given  to  the  principles  of  Freedom  advocated  by 
Jefferson. 

1  remain,  dear  Sir,  faithfully  yours, 

Chaeles  Sumner. 

Hon.  Edward  Coles. 


Thb  history  of  tlic  efforts  for  the  escluaion  of  Slavery  from  the  North- 
west Teri'itory  is  thus  related  by  Mr.  Webster,'in  the  speeches  above 
referred  to. 

"  An  attempt  has  been  made  to  trimsfflr  from  the  North  to  the  South  the 
honor  of  this  axoliision  of  Shivery  from  the  Northwestern  TeiTitorj.  The 
Joun)al,-witlioiit  argument  or  comment,  refutes  such  attempts,  ThaoeBsion 
by  Virginia  was  made  in  March,  1TS4.  On  the  19th  of  April  followmg,  a 
committee,  consisting  of  Messrs.  Jeffbrson,  Cliase,  and  Howeli,  repoitad  a 
plan  for  a  temporary  government  of  the  Territory,  in  which  was  this  arti- 
cle: 'That,  after  the  year  18W,thero  sliall  be  neither  slavery  nor  involun- 
tary servitnde  in  any  of  the  sidd  States,  otherwise  than  in  pnnishment  of 
crimes,  whereof  the  party  shall  have  been  eonvioted.'  Mr  Spaight,  of  North 
Carolina,  moved  to  atrite  ont  this  paragraph.  The  question  waa  put,  aooord- 
ins  to  tlie  form  then  practised, '  Shall  these  words  stand  as  a  part  of  the 
plan  i* '  New  Harapahire,  Massachusetts,  Ehode  Island,  Connecticut,  New 
Yorli.  New  Jersey,  and  Pennsylvania,  seven  Stales,  voted  in  the  affirmative ; 
Maryland,  Virginia,  and  South  Carolina,  in  the  negative.  North  Carolina 
was  divided.    As  the  consent  of  nine  States  was  necessary,  the  words  could 


■cibyGoogIc 


86    AUTHOESHIP  OF  THE  OEDIHANCE  OF  FREEDOM. 

not  stand,  nnd  were  struck  out  aooordingly.  Mr.  Jeffaraon  voteii  for  the 
olanse,  bat  was  overruled  by  !ub  culleBgueB. 

"In  Mnroh  of  Ihe  uentyHar  (1T86),  Mr.  Kiag,  of  Maaeachuaetta,  aeconded 
by  Mr.  EUery,  of  Bhode  Island,  prflposed  the  formerly  rejected  article,  witli 
thia  addition;  'And  tbut  this  regulation  shall  be  an  article  of  compact,  and 
Temain  a  fundalnenlsl  principle  of  the  constitutions  between  the  thirteen 
ori^nid  States  and  eaeh  of  the  States  described  in  the  resolve.'  On  thia 
clanse,  which  provided  the  adequate  and  thorough  security,  the  Bight  North- 
ern States  at  that  time  voted  affirmatively,  and  the  four  Southern  States 
negatively.!  The  votes  of  nine  States  were  not  yet  obtained,  and  thos  the 
provision  was  again  rejected  by  t'be  Southern  States.  The  perseverance  of 
the  North  held  out,  and  two  years  afterwards  the  object  was  attained,"  by 
the  passage,  on  the  18th  of  July,  17ST,  with  only  one  dissenting  voice,  of  the 
"  Ordinance  for  the  Government  of  the  Territory  of  the  United  States  Noi-th- 
Tvest  of  the  River  Ohio." 

"  We  are  accustomed.  Sir,  to  praise  the  lawgivers  of  Antlqnity;  we  help 
to  perpetuate  the  fame  of  Solon  and  Lyourgus ;  hut  I  doubt  whether  one 
single  law  of  any  lawgiver,  ancient  or  modem,  has  produced  effects  of 
more  distinct,  marked,  and  lasting  cliaraeter  than  the  Ordinance  of  1737. 
That  histrunient  was  drawn  by  Natbiin  Dane,  then  and  now  a  citizen  of 
Massaohusetts.  It  was  adopted,  as  I  thuik  I  have  understood,  without  the 
slightest  ulteraUon!  and  certainly  it  has  happened  l«  few  men  to  be  the 
Buthorsofapolitical  measure  of  more  large  and  enduring  conseqnanco.  It 
fixed  forever  the  character  of  liia  population  in  the  vast  regions  northwest 
of  tJie  Ohio,  by  excluding  from  them  involnntary  servitude.  It  impressed 
on  the  soil  Itself  while  it  was  yet  a  wilderness,  an  incapacity  to  sustain  any 
other  than  freemen.  It  laid  the  interdict  against  personal  servitude  in  orig- 
inal compact,  not  only  deeper  than  all  local  law,  but  deeper,  also,  than^  all 


1  More  precisely,  the  seven  Northern  State?,  together  with  Maryland, 
affirmatively,  — and  four  of  the  Southern  States,  namely,  Virginia,  Nortli 
and  South  Carolina,  and  Georgia,  negatively,  —  Delaware  being  unrepre- 
sented. 


;db,Googlc 


FREEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVERY  SEC- 
TIONAL 


Speech  in  the  Senate,  on  a  Motion  to  hepeai.  the  Fugitive  Si^"vb 
Act,  August  26,  1852. 


Nihil  aiitam  gloriosius  libertate  prieter  virtutem,  ai  tameii  libertus  reote  a 
Tirlute  BBJmigitiir.  —  Jojib  of  Salisbuet. 

If  any  mnii  thinks  thnt  the  interest  of  these  Nations  and  the  interest  of 
Chriatianity  are  two  separate  and  distinct  (hlngs,  I  wish  my  soul  may  never 
enter  into  hia  aeoret Oliveii  Ceomweli,. 

Mr.  Madlaon  thought  it  WRONG  to  admit  in  the  Coiistitntion  the  idea 
that  there  could  be  property  in  men.  —  Debates  m  ike  Federal  GmtKttlioa, 
August  26,  1787. 


■cibyGoogIc 


"  0  Slare,  I  liave  bought  thee."  "  That  is  thy  business,"  h«  replieil. 
"  Wilt  thou  run  away  ?  "     "  That  is  my  business,"  said  the  sIhtb. 

Arabian  Procerb. 

Alise  sunt  logoa  Otesarura,  alite  Christi:  aliud  Papinianus,  aliud  Pnnlns 

St.  Jerome,  E^titlola  ad  Oceaiaaa  de  Morle  Fa&iiiis.' 

If  the  marshal  of  tha  host  bids  ua  do  anything,  shall  we  do  it,  if  it  be 
against  the  great  captain?  Again,  if  the  great  captain  bid  ua  do  anything, 
and  tliB  king  or  tlie  emperor  oommandeth  us  to  do  another,  dost  Ihou  doubt 
that  we  must  obey  the  commandment  of  the  king  or  emperor,  and  cnnteran 
the  commandment  of  the  great  captain?  Therefore,  if  the  king  or  the  em- 
peror bid  one  thing,  and  God  another,  we  must  obey  God,  and  contemn  and 
not  regard  neither  king  nor  emperor. 

Henet  Vni.,  Gtaase  of  Tmlh. 

Si  ta  petle  avoit  des  charges,  des  dignit^s,  des  honneurs,  dea  bSn^GoBS 
et  des  pensions  a  distribuer,  elle  auroit  bienCot  des  th^ologiens  et  des  juris- 
coiisnlles  qui  soutiendroient  qu'elle  est  de  droit  divin,  et  que  c'est  un  ptelid 
de  s'opposer  &  bbs  ravages 

Abbb  db  Mably,  Droiti  et  Devoirt  da  Ciloyen,  Lettre  11. 

Cleim&te.   What,  tokiil  innocents.  Sir?    It  cannot  bo. 

It  is  no  [tile  in  justice  there  to  punisii. 
Lawyer.   Oh,  Sir, 

Yon  understand  a,  conscience,  but  not  law. 
Geanlhet.   Why,  Sir,  is  ^lere  so  main  a  difference? 
Launfer.    You  '11  never  be  good  lawyer,  if  you  understand  not  tliaL 
CSeaiilh£s.   I  think,  then,  't  is  the  be?t  to  be  a  bad  one. 

MabbisQbr,  The  Old  Lay),  Act  L  So.  1. 

Among  the  assemblies  of  the  great 
A  greater  Giilor  takes  his  seat; 
The  God  of  heaven  as  judge  surveys 
Those  gods  on  eai-th  and  all  their  ways. 

Why  will  ye,  then,  frame  wicked  laws  ? 
Or  why  support  the  unrighteous  cause  ? 

Isaac  Watti 


;db,Googlc 


When  Mr.  Sumner  entered  the  Senate,  he  found  what  were  known 
as  the  Compromise  Measures  alraatly  adopted,  among  which  was  the 
odious  Fugitive  Slave  BUI.  These  were  msintained  hy  the  constant 
assumptioa  that  Slaveiy  was  a  national  inistituHou,  entitled  to  the  pro- 
tection of  the  Nation,  while  those  who  opposed  them  were  denounced 
as  SeefionaliBts.  These  words  were  made  to  play  a  great  part.  Both 
the  old  parties.  Whig  and  Democrat,  plumed  themselros  upon  being 
naiionol,  and  one  of  their  hardest  hits  at  a  politieal  opponent  was  to 
ohai'ge  him  with  ssdiimalism.  Mr.  Sumner  undertook,  while  showing 
the  unconstitutionality  and  offensive  character  of  tlie  Fngitive  Slave 
Bill,  to  torn  tliese  party  words  upon  his  opponents,  insisting  that 
Slavery  was  Sectional  and  Freedom  NationaL  The  title  of  the  speech 
enihodiefi  this  fundamental  idea,  which  was  generally  adopted  hy  the 
opponents  of  Slavery. 

In  making  this  effort  Mr.  Sumner  had  against  him  both  the  old  par- 
ties, fresh  from  their  National  Conventions.  The  Demooi'ats  hod  just 
nominated  Franklin  Pierce  for  tlie  Presidency,  and  the  Whigs  General 
Scott ;  hut  the  two  paitias  concurred  on  the  Slavery  Question,  and 
especially  in  support  of  tha  Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  which  was  named 
in  hoth  platforms. 

Tha  Democrats,  in  their  platform,  declared  as  follows  :  — 

"  That  the  Demooratro  party  will  renist  ail  attempts  nt  renewing,  hi  Con- 
gress or  ont  of  it,  the  agitation  of  the  Slavery  question,  under  wiiatever 
shape  or  color  the  attempt  may  be  made." 

The  Whigs,  in  their  platform,  declared  as  follows  :  — 


Here  was  nothing  less  than  a  joint  gag,  which  would  have  been  en- 
forced against  Mr.  Sumner,  as  it  had  been  a  few  weeks  before,  if  he  had 
not  succeeded  in  planting  himself  on  a  motion  cleaily  in  order,  wliich 
opened  the  whole  question.  Before  speaking,  he  was  approached  by 
several,  who  asked  Mm  to  give  up  his  purpose,  or  at  least,  if  he 
spoke,  not  %o  divide  the  Senate.     To  all  he  replied,  that,  God  willing 


;db,Googlc 


90  FKEEDOM   NATIONAL,   SLAVERY   SECTIONAL: 

he  should  apeak,  and  would  press  the  question  to  a  Tote,  if  he  ivera 
left  alone.  A  curious  parallel  to  tliis  incident  n-ill  be  found  in  the  Life 
of  Sir  Fowell  Baxton,  when  this  eminent  Abolitionist  was  pressed  not 
to  bring  forward  in  the  House  of  Commons  his  motion  againet  Slavery, 
and  especiSiUy  not  t«  divide  the  Honae.  Against  the  entreaties  of 
friends,  pei'sonal  and  political,  he  persevered ;  and  this  firmness  of  pur- 
pose was  the  beginning  of  that  victory  hy  which  shortly  aftensards 
British  Emancipation  waa.  secured,  l 

From  the  statement  in  the  Globe  it  appears  that  Mr.  Sumner  spoke 
for  three  hoiu?B  and  three  qiiarters,  when  a  debate  ensued,  in  nhicli  the 
following  Senators  took  part ;  Messrs.  Clemens,  of  Alabama,  Badger,  of 
Korth  Carolina,  Dodge,  of  Iowa,  Hale,  of  New  Hampshire,  Douglas,  of 
Illinois,  Weller,  of  California,  Chase,  of  Ohio,  Eusk,  of  Texas,  Toucey, 
of  Conneeticut,  Bi'adbury,  of  Maine,  Hunter,  of  Vii^nia,  James,  of 
Ehode  Island,  Bright,  of  Indiana,  Cooper,  of  Pennsylvania,  BulJer,  of 
South  Carolina,  Brodhead,  of  Pennsylvania,  Pratt,  of  Maryland,  Ma- 
son, of  Yirginia,  and  Cass,  of  Michigan. 

Mr.  Clemens  opened  the  debate  mth  personal  attack  which  is  a 
specimen  of  the  brutalities  of  Slavery  ;  but  there  was  no  call  to  orfer. 
He  was  followed  by  Mr.  Badger,  who  undertook  a  fonnal  reply,  but 
could  not  avoid  the  personalities  which  were  so  natural  U>  sjieakei's  vin- 
dicating Slavery.  He  began  by  remarking ;  "  I  think  1  may  say,  with- 
out haffiud  or  fear  of  contradiction,  that  the  Senate  of  the  United  States 
never  heard  a  more  extraordinary  speech  than  that  which  has  juat  been 
delivered  by  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  —  extraoi'dinary  in  its 
character,  and  moat  extraordinary  in  the  time  and  the  occasion  wMch  the 

gentleman  choae  for  its  delivery Three  hours  and  three  quaitcra 

has  the  gentleman  occupied,  at  this  late  period  of  the  session,  with  Hob 
discussion."  After  considering  at  aome  length  the  constitutionality  of 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  especially  in  answer  to  Mr,  Sumner,  he  pro- 
ceeded to  quote  from  the  speech  at  Faneuil  Hall  (ante.  Vol,  11.  pp. 
888-424)  denouncing  the  Pnptive  Slave  Bill,  and  tlienaoid,  "I  shud- 
der, when  I  think  of  these  expressions."  Fumeroua  quotations  followed, 
and  he  eliaiged  upon  the  speech  a  pernicious  influence  on  the  public 
mind,  stimulating  to  violence.  After  exposing  the  former  speech,  Mr. 
Badger  proceeded  to  comment  again  upon  that  just  made.  "This 
speech,-  Mr.  President,  is  well  calculated  to  stii'  np  the  people  of  Massa- 
chusetts. They  look  to  the  honorable  Senator  for  direction  and  guid- 
ance ;  they  consider  him  a  '  marvellous  proper  man,'  and,  avaOing  him- 
self of  his  influence  over  them,  he  delivers  himself  of  such  a  tiiade  ol 

Memoirs  of  Sir  Thomas  Fowell  Buxton,  by  hia  Sou,  Ch.  18. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL    OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLA.VE   ACT.  91 

abuse  upon  tlie  1  w  f  li  wn  intry —  kw  p  J*  I  by  t]  very 
Cenate,  in  which  h    L  tl        ar    many  ge  tl  h       ted  for 

ttod  still  Eoppoi-t  th  t  1  w — as  isuiljltdf      j  It      mo-' 

m  nt       8(1  n     t    wl   1 1        ys,  to  co       us  with       m  Does 

h  hope  to  a  mpl  h  yth  ^  i^it  to  tir  p  sedit  t  home 
agMnat  thi    law       d       k    th      tr    ts    f  Boat      a^        th  e  of 

disgiac  M  not       d  1     1  bs  vi  1         by  tl     1     1  ss    pp  f  the 

C  jLbti  t   n  and  1  w      f  th    Umt  d  St  tea !  H  -iir  s:       I  have 

benamml        fthhodhastlStewti        d       1  fhi- 

bition.       rh,n,  with  asne      t  Ant   la     ym  f  d    ,    the 

Senator  added,  that,  "  admitting  eve  yth  g  th  y  say  as  t  th  d  ir 
blenesa  of  aholishing  Slavery,  it  is  utt    ly  mj  ract  et  bl 

Mr.  Dodge  and  Mr.  Douglas  insistel    po     th      llg  ti  d 

the  Constitution.  So  did  Mr.  Toiioej  M  Brad!"  uy  M  B  ght  d 
others.  Mr.  Cass  Justified  his  origi  1  jitfthCmp  ise 
measuKs  by  his  fear  for  the  Uiuon    sayi  g,      T      p    k  d      ry 

language,  I  was  almost  ft-ightened  to  d    th  I  w  uld  h  ted 

for  twenty  Fugitive  Slave  Laws,  if  I  had  hi  d  th  saf  ty  f  th 
Union  depended  upon  my  doing  so '  d  tb  h  dd  d  S  th 
Fugitive  Slave  Law  is  now  in  force.    It  hall  be  t(     h  d         1 

tered,  or  shaken,  or  repealed,  by  aoy  vote  of  mme.  Tliat  is  the  plain 
English  of  it. " 

Mr.  Weller  imitateil  Mr.  Clemenfl  and  Mr.  Badger  in  personalities. 
He  began  by  a  confession  as  follows.  ' '  I  will  say,  Sir,  at  the  outset, 
that  this  is  the  first  time  in  the  course  of  my  life  that  I  have  listened 
to  the  whole  of  an  Abolition  speech.  I  did  not  know  that  it  was  pos- 
sible that  I  could  endure  a  speech  for  over  three  hours  upon  the  sub- 
ject of  the  Abolition  of  Slaveiy.  But  this  omtion  of  the  Senator 
from  Massachusetts  to-day  has  been  so  handsomely  embellished  with 
poetry,  both  Latin  and  English,  so  full  of  classical  allusions  and 
rhetorical  flourishes,  as  t«  make  it  much  more  palatable  than  I  sup- 
posed it  could  have  been  made."  He  then  proceeded  to  say,  among 
other  things,  "If  the  constituents  of  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts 
foUow  his  direction,  if  they  obey  his  counsels,  murder,  I  lepeat,  is 
inevitable  ;  and  upon  your  hands,  Sir,  ay,  upon  your  hands  [address- 
ing Mr.  Sumnee],  must  rest  the  blood  of  those  murdered  men 
This  forcible  resistance  is  not  only  ovulated  to  strilte  at  the  very 
foundation  of  onr  republican  institutions  by  dissolving  the  Union,  but 
to  bring  upon  the  head  of  the  learned  Senator  from  Massachusetts  the 
blood  of  murdered  men.  He  who  counsels  murder  is  himself  a  mur- 
derer." Here  Mr.  Weller  followed  the  lead  of  Mr.  Badgei  in  inisrepie 
Bcnting  tlie  speech  just  made.     Mr.  Sumner  iiiteirupt^d  him  to  say. 


;db,Googlc 


92  FREEDOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVEEY   SECTIONAL  : 

"  Hot  one  word  lias  fallen  from  my  lips  to-daj,  Euggeating  in  any  way 
a  resort  to  force." 

Mr.  Sumner  was  not  wiUiout  defenders,  and  wliat  they  Sfud  belongs 
to  this  history.  Early  in  the  detiat«  Mr.  Hale  expressed  Mmaelf 
sliongly. 

"  I  feel  that  I  should  be  doing  injustice  to  my  own  feelings,  and  in- 
justice to  my  friend,  the  Senator  from  Mossaohusetta,  if  I  were  to  fail  at 
this  time  to  expre^  the  yery  great  gratitieation  with  which  I  listened 
tfl  his  speech.  In  saying  that,  I  do  not  mean  to  pass  by  entirely  the 
honorable  Senator  from.  North  Carolina  [Mr.  Badger],  for  I  listened  to 
him,  aa  I  always  do,  with  great  pleasare  ;  hut  justice  compels  me  U>  say 
that  by  tar  the  best  part  of  his  speech  was  the  extract  which  he  read 
from  a,  former  speeiJi  of  the  honorable  Senator  from  Massachusetts. 
[La-ughter.]  1  listened  to  them  both  with  great  pleasure ;  but,  Sir,  I 
feel  bound  io  say  to-day,  that  it  is  my  deliberate  conviction  that  the 
honorable  Senator  fmm  Massachusetts,  if  he  were  actuated  by  as  corrupt 
and  selfish  motives  as  can  possibly  be  attiibuted  to  him,  has,  so  far  as 
his  own  personal  fame  and  reputation  are  concerned,  done  enough  by  the 
effort  he  haa  made  here  to-day  to  place  himself  side  by  sicie  with  the  iiist 
orators  of  antiquity,  and  as  far  ahead  of  any  living  American  orator  as 
Freedom  is  ahead  of  Slavery.  I  believe  that  he  has  formed  to-day  a 
new  era  in  the  history  of  the  politics  and  of  the  eloquence  of  the  coun- 
try, and  that  in  future  generations  the  young  men  of  this  nation  will 
he  stimulated  tfl  effort  by  the  record  of  what  an  American  Senator  has 
this  day  done,  to  which  all  the  appeals  drawn  from  ancient  history 
would  be  entuely  inadequate.  Yes,  Sir,  he  has  to-day  made  a  draft 
upon  the  gratitude  of  the  friends  of  humanity  and  of  liberty  that  will 
not  be  paid  through  many  generations,  and  the  memory  of  which  shall 
endure  as  long  as  the  English  language  is  spoken,  or  the  history  of 
this  Republic  forms  a  part  of  the  annals  of  the  world.  That,  Sir,  is  what 
I  believe ;  and  if  I  had  one  other  feeling,  or  could  indulge  in  it,  in  refer- 
ence to  that  effort,  it  would  be  a  feeling  of  envy,  that  it  was  not  in 
me  to  tread  even  at  an  humble  distance  in  the  path  which  he  has  so 
nobly  and  eloquently  illustrated." 

Mr.  Chase  adopted  the  ai^wment  of  Mr.  Sumner  against  the  Fugi- 
tive Slave  BUI,  and  vindicated  him  personally. 

"  The  argument  which  my  friend  from  MaBsachusetts  has  addressed 
to  ns  to-day  was  not  an  assault  npon  the  Constitution.  It  was  a 
noble  vindication  of  that  great  charter  of  govemmetit  from  the  per- 
versions of  the  advocates  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act Wliat 

has  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  asserted  ?  That  the  fugitive  ser- 
vant claiiae  of  the  Constitution  is  a  clause  of  compact  between  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITm!  SLAVE   ACT.  93 

Sfeitea,  and  eonfere  no  legislative  power  upon  Congress.  He  lias  ar- 
rayed history  and  reason  in  support  of  this  proposition  ;  and  I  avow 
my  oonviolion,  now  and  here,  that,  lo^eally  and  MBtorically,  his  argu- 
ment is  impregnable,  entirely  impregnable 

"Let  me  add,  Mr.  President,  that  in  my  judgment  the  speech  of 
my  friend  fi-oni  Massachusetts  will  mark  AH  Elti  in  American  history. 
It  will  distinguish  the  day  when  the  advocates  of  that  theory  of  gov- 
ernmental policy,  constitutional  construction,  which  he  has  so  ably 
defended  and  so  brilliantly  illustrated,  no  longer  content  to  stand 
on  the  defensive  in  the  contest  with  Slavery,  boldly  attacked  the 
very  dtadel  of  its  power,  in  that  doctrine  of  finality  wliioh  two  of 
the  political  paities  of  the  country,  through  their  national  organiza- 
tions, are  endeavoring  to  estaMish  as  the  impregnable  defence  of  its 
naurpations." 

On  the  close  of  the  debate,  the  proposition  of  Mr.  Sumner  was  re- 
jected by  the  following  vote. 

Yeas,  —  Mesai's.  Chase,  Hale,  Sumner,  and  Wade,  —  i. 

Kays,  —  Messrs.  Adams,  Badger,  Bayard,  Bell,  Borland,  Bradbury, 
Bright,  Brodhead,  Brooke,  Butler,  Ca^  Charlton,  Clarke,  Clemens, 
Cooper,  Dawson,  De  Saussure,  Dodge,  of  Iowa,  Douglas,  Felch,  Fish, 
Geyer,  Gwin,  Hamlin,  Houston,  Hunter,  James,  Jones,  of  Iowa,  King, 
Mallory,  Mangum,  Mason,  Meriwether,  Miller,  Moi-ton,  Pearoe,  Pratt, 
Rusk,  Shields,  Smith,  Soul4  Spruance,  Touc«y,  Undenvood,  Upham, 
Walker,  and  Weller,  —  47. 

Mr.  Seward  was  absent,  —  prohahly  constrained  by  his  prpminenco 
as  a  supporter  of  General  Scott. 

Tliis  speech,  when  published,  found  an  extensive  echo.  It  was  cir- 
culated not  only  through  the  press,  but  in  large  pamphlet  editions, 
amounting  f«  several  hundred  thousand.  It  was  translated  into  Ger- 
man. Two  or  more  editions  appeared  in  England.  In  the  preface  to 
the  English  edition  of  "  Uncle  Tom's  CaMn,"  Lord  Carlisle  associated 
the  speech  with  tliat  work,  and  signalized  "the  closeness  of  its  lo^e 
and  the  masculine  vigor  of  its  eloquence,"  Lord  Shaftesbury,  in  a 
letter  to  the  London  Times,  wrote,  "What  noble  eloi^uence  I"  Mi, 
Combe,  the  phrenologist,  in  a  letter  to  a  distinguished  American,  which 
was  published  at  the  time,  said  :  "  I  have  read  every  word  of  this 
sX)eeoh  with  pleasure  and  with  pain.  The  pain  arose  from  the  subject, 
— the  pleasure  from  sympathy  with  and  admiration  of  the  speaker. 
I  have  long  desired  to  know  the  merits  of  that  most  cruel  and  in- 
iquitous enactment,  and  tliis  speech  has  made  them  dear  as  day." 


■cibyGoogIc 


94  FREEDOM    NATIONAL,    SLAVERY   SECTIONAL. 

The  London.  Examiner  said:  "Apart  from  its  noble  and  affecting 
eloi^uunce,  it  is  one  of  tlie  cioseat  and  most  convincing  arguments 
we  have  ever  read  on  the  policy  of  the  oarlier  and  greater,  as  con- 
trsst«cl  with  that  of  the  lat«T  and  meaner  statesmen  of  America." 
These  testimonies  might  be  aooumiilated.  They  are  introduced  only 
so  far  aa  may  be  imporiaint  in  giving  an  idea  of  the  contemporaneous 
reception  of  this  speech.  The  title  had  a  T<^e  beyond  the  speech 
itself,  aa  it  became  one  of  the  eonnters^ns  of  onr  polities. 

Letters  also  illnstrate  the  speech.  Mr.  Seward,  who  was  not  in  his 
seat  at  its  delivery,  wrote,  on  reading  it :  "Your  speech  is  an  admi- 
rable, a  great,  a  very  great  one.  That  is  my  opinion,  and  everybody 
around  me,  of  all  sorts,  confesses  it."  Mr.  Chose  wrota  also :  "  I  have 
read,  as  well  as  heard,  your  truly  great  speech.  Hundreds  of  thousands 
will  read  it,  and  everywhere  it  will  carry  conviotion  to  all  willing  to 
be  convinced,  and  willinfuseafeelingof  incertitude  and  a  fearful  look- 
ing for  judgment  in  the  minds  of  those  who  resist  the  light  and  toil  in 
the  harness  of  party  platfonna  irreconcilable  with  justice."  Mr.  Wil- 
son, who  had  not  yet  been  elected  to  the  Senate,  wrote  :  "I  have  read 
your  glorious  speech.  How  proud  I  am  that  God  gave  me  the  power 
to  aid  in  placing  you  in  the  Senate  I  You  have  exhausted  the  ques- 
tion. Hereafter  all  that  can  be  said  will  be  to  repeat  your  speech. 
It  will  afford  to  any  one  the  most  complete  view  of  the  questions  in 
dispute  of  anything  ever  published."  Hon.  Stephen  C.  PhiUips,  who 
had  taken  a  leading  part  in  the  Fkc-SoiI  oi^nization  of  Massachusetts, 
wrote !  "  1  regard  it  as  ft  contribution  of  inestimahle  value  to  our  noble 
cause,  worth  all  the  labor,  all  the  time,  all  tie  self-sacrifiee,  and  all 
tJiB  misrepresentation  it  has  cost  you.  It  is  atatesmanliie  in  all  its 
features,  and  does  all  that  is  necessary  to  place  onr  simple  and  entire 
design  in  its  true  light  before  the  country,  and  before  the  world,  and  in 
the  records  of  histoiy."  Wendell  PhiUips,  while  differing  on  soma 
points,  wrote  !  "  I  have  read  your  speech  with  envious  admiration.  It 
is  admirable,  both  as  a  masterly  ailment  and  a  noble  testimony,  and 
will  endear  you  to  thousands."  These  extracts,  which  might  be  ex- 
tended, show  the  response  to  this  effort. 


■cibyGoogIc 


SPEECH. 


TnoESDAY,  26th  August,  1852.  —  Tlie  Civil  and  IDiplomatia  Appro- 
priation Bill  being  under  consideration,  tlia  following  amendment  was 
moved  by  Mr.  Hunter,  of  Virginia,  on  tha  recommendation  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  Finance. 

"  That,  where  the  ministerial  officers  of  the  United  States  have  or  ehall 
incur  eitraordinary  expense  In  executing  the  lawa  tharaof,  the  payment 
of  which  is  not  specifioidly  provided  for,  the  President  of  the  United  States 
is  authorized  to  allow  the  pajmient  thereof,  under  the  special  taxation  of  the 
District  or  Circuit  Court  of  the  District  in  which  the  said  services  have 
bean  or  shall  be  rendered,  to  be  paid  from  the  appropriation  for  defraying 
the  expenses  of  the  Judiciary." 

Mr.  SlTMKBR  seized  the  opportunity  for  which  he  had  been  waiting, 
and  at  once  moved  the  following  amendment  to  the  amendment ;  — 

"  Provided,  That  no  such  allowanoa  shall  lie  authorized  for  any  expenses 
incurred  in  executing  the  Act  of  September  IS,  18B0,  for  the  surrender  of 
fngitives  from  service  Or  labor;  which  said  Act  is  hereby  repealed,'' 

On  this  he  took  the  floor,  and  spoke  as  follows. 

ME.  PRESIDENT,  — Here  is  a  provision  for  ex- 
traordinary expenses  incurred  in  executing  the 
laws  of  the  United  States.  Extraordinary  expenses  !  Sir, 
beneatli  these  speciotis  words  lurks  the  very  subject  on 
■which,  by  a  solemn  vote  of  this  body,  I  was  refused  a 
hearing.  Here  it  is ;  no  longer  open  to  the  chaise  of 
being  an  "  abstraction,"  but  actually  presented  for  prac- 
tical legislation ;  not  introduced  by  me,  but  by  the 
Senator  from  Vii^inia  [Mr.  Huntek],  on  the  recommen- 
dation of  an  iniportant  committee  of  the  Senate ;  not 


■cibyGoogIc 


96  FREEDOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVERY    SECTIONAL; 

brought  forward  weeks  ago,  when  there  was  ample  time 
for  discussion,  but  only  at  this  moment,  without  any 
reference  to  the  late  period  of  the  session.  The  amend- 
ment which  I  offer  proposes  to  remove  one  chief  occa- 
sion of  these  estraordinaiy  expenses.  Beyond  all  con- 
troversy or  cavil  it  is  strictly  in  order.  And  now,  at 
last,  among  these  final  crowded  days  of  our  duties  here, 
but  at  this  earliest  opportunity,  I  am  to  be  heard, —  not 
as  a  favor,  but  as  a  right.  The  graceful  usages  of  this 
body  may  be  abandoned,  but  the  established  privileges 
of  debate  cannot  be  abridged.  Parliamentary  courtesy 
may  be  forgotten,  but  parhamentaiy  law  must  prevail 
The  subject  is  bixiadly  before  the  Senate.  By  the  bless- 
ing of  God  it  shall  be  discussed. 

Sir,  a  severe  lawgiver  of  early  Greece  vainly  sought 
to  secure  permanence  for  his  imperfect  institutions  by 
providing  that  the  citizen  who  at  any  time  attempted 
their  repeal  or  alteration  should  appear  in  the  public 
assembly  with  a  halter  about  his  neck,  ready  to  be 
drawn,  if  his  proposition  failed.  A  tyrannical  spirit 
among  us,  in  unconscious  imitation  of  this  antique  and 
discarded  barbarism,  seeks  to  surround  an  offensive  in- 
stitution with  similar  safeguard.  In  the  existing  dis- 
temper of  the  public  mind,  and  at  this  present  juncture, 
no  man  can  enter  upon  the  service  which  I  now  under- 
take, without  personal  responsibility,  such  as  can  be 
sustained  only  by  that  sense  of  duty  which,  under  God, 
is  always  our  best  support.  Tliat  personal  responsibil- 
ity I  accept.  Before  the  Senate  and  the  country  let  me 
be  lield  accountable  for  this  act  and  for  every  word 
which  I  utter. 

With  me.  Sir,  there  is  no  alternative.  Painfully  con- 
vinced of  the  unutterable  wrong  and  woe  of  Slavery,  — 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLATE  ACT.  97 

profoundly  believing,  that,  according  to  the  true  spirit  of 
the  CoHstitution  and  the  sentiments  of  the  Fathers,  it 
can  find  no  place  under  our  National  Government, — 
that  it  is  in  every  respect  sectional,  and  in  no  respect 
aiaiional,  ^fh&t  it  is  always  and  everywhere  creature 
find  dependant  of  the  States,  and  never  anywhere  crea- 
ture or  dependant  of  the  Nation,  —  and  that  the  Nation 
can  never,  hy  legislative  or  other  act,  impart  to  it  any 
siipport,  under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  btates  — 
with  these  convictions  I  could  not  allow  this  session  to 
reach  its  close  without  making  or  seizin^  m  opportunity 
to  declare  myself  openly  against  tlie  usuipation  mjus 
tice,  and  cruelty  of  the  late  intolerable  enactment  toi 
the  recoveiy  of  fugitive  slaves.  Full  well  I  know  bn 
the  difficulties  of  this  discussion,  aiismg  from  piejudi- 
eea  of  opinion  and  from  adverse  conclusions  strong  and 
sincere  as  my  own.  Full  well  I  knew  that  I  im  m  i 
small  minority,  with  few  here  to  whom  I  can  lo  k  foi 
sympathy  or  support.  FuH  well  I  knew  th^t  I  mu'it 
utter  things  unwelcome  to  many  in  this  bidy  which 
I  cannot  do  without  pain.  Full  well  I  know  that  the 
institution  of  Slavery  in  our  countrj  which  I  now  pro 
ceed  to  consider,  is  as  sensitive  as  it  ii  powerful 
possessing  a  power  to  shake  the  whole  linl  with  a 
sensitiveness  that  shrinks  and  tremlles  at  the  touch 
But  while  these  things  may  propeily  piompt  me  to 
caution  and  reserve,  they  cannot  ehanp,e  my  duty  oi  my 
determination  to  perform  it.  For  this  I  willin^lv  toiqet 
myself  and  aU  personal  consecLuences  The  f^\or  anl 
good-will  of  my  feUow-citizens,  of  my  brethicn  of  the 
Senate,  Sir,  grateful  to  me  as  they  ]uslly  ire  I  i  n 
ready,  if  required,  to  sacrifice.  Wliate\ei  I  •wa  or  mi> 
be  I  freely  offer  to  this  cause. 


■cibyGoogIc 


as  FREEDOM .  NATIOKAL,   8LAVEEY  SECTIONAL 

Here  allow,  for  one  moment,  a  reference  to  myself 
and  my  position,  Sir,  I  have  never,  been  a  poUtician, 
The  slave  of  principles,  I,  call  no  party  master.  By  sen- 
timent, education,  and  conviction  a  friend  of  Hitman 
Kights  in  their  utmost  expansion,  I  have  ever  most 
sincerely  embraced  the  Democratic  Idea,  —  not,  indeed, 
as  represented  or  professed  by  any  party,  but  according 
to  its  real  significance,  as  transfigured  in  the  Declaration 
of  Independence  and  in  the  injunctions  of  Christianity. 
In  this  idea  I  see  no  narrow  advantage  merely  for  indi- 
viduals or  classes,  but  the  sovereignty  of  the  people,  and 
the  greatest  happiness  of  all  secured  by  ecLual  laws. 
Amidst  the  vicissitudes  of  pubhc  affairs  I  shall  hold 
fast  always  to  this  idea,  and  to  any  political  party  which 
truly  embraces  it. 

Party  does  not  constrain  me ;  nor  is  my  indepen- 
dence lessened  by  any  relations  to  the  office  which  gives 
me  a  title  to  be  heard  on  this  floor.  Here,  Sir,  I 
speak  proudly.  By  no  effort,  by  no  desire  of  my  own; 
I  find  myself  a  Senator  of  the  United  States.  Never 
before  have  I  held  public  office  of  any  kind.  With  the 
ample  opportunities  of  private  life  I  was  content.  Ko 
tombstone  for  me  could  bear  a  fairer  inscription  than 
this :  "  Here  lies  one  who,  without  the  honors  or  emolu- 
ments of  public  station,  did  something  for  his  feUow- 
men."  From  such  simple  aspirations  I  was  taken  away 
by  the  free  choice  of  my  native  Commonwealtii,  and 
placed  at  this  responsible  post  of  duty,  without  personal 
obligation  of  any  kind,  beyond  what  was  implied  in  my 
life  and  published  words.  The  earnest  friends  by  whose 
confidence  I  was  first  designated  asked  nothing  from 
me,  and  throughout  the  long  conflict  which  ended  in 
my  election  rejoiced  in  the  position  which  I  most  care- 


■cibyGooglc 


REPEAL   OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  99 

fully  guarded.  To  all  my  language  was  uniform :  that  I 
did  not  desire  to  be  brought  forward  ;  tbat  I  would  do 
nothing  to  promote  tl  ult  tl  at  I  had  no  pledges  or 
promises  to  offer ;  th  t  tl  e  ffi  hould  seek  me,  and 
not  I  the  office ;  and  hat  t  1  Id  find  me  in  aU  re- 
spects an  independent  na  I  d  to  no  party  and  to  no 
human  being,  but  only  a  din  to  my  best  ju(%ment, 
to  act  for  the  good  of  all  Again,  Sir,  I  speak  with  pride, 
both  for  myself  and  others,  when  I  add  that  these  avow- 
als foimd  a  sympathizing  response.  In  this  spirit  I  have 
come  here,  and  in  this  spirit  I  shall  speak  to-day. 

Eejoicing  in  my  independence,  and  claiming  nothing 
&om  party  ties,  I  throw  myself  upon  the  candor  and 
magnanimity  of  the  Senate.  I  ask  your  attention  ;  I 
trust  not  to  abuse  it.  I  may  speak  strongly,  for  I_ 
shall  speak  openly  and  from  the  strength  of  my  convic- 
tions. I  may  speak  warmly,  for  I  shall  epeak  from 
the  heart.  But  in  no  event  can  I  foi^et  the  amenities 
which  belong  to  debate,  and  which  especially  become 
this  body.  Slavery  I  must  condemn  with  my  whole 
soul ;  but  hero  I  need  only  borrow  the  languf^e  of 
slaveholders ;  nor  would  it  accord  with  my  habits  or 
my  sense  of  justice  to  exhibit  them  as  the  impersona- 
tion of  the  institution  —  Jefferson  calls  it  the  "enor- 
mity"^—which  they  cherish.  Of  them  I  do  not  speak; 
but  without  fear  and  without  favor,  as  without  impeach- 
ment of  any  person,  I  assail  this  wrong.  Again,  Sir,  I 
may  err ;  but  it  wiU.  be  with  the  Fathers.  I  plant  my- 
self on  the  ancient  ways  of  the  Eepublic,  with  its 
grandest  names,  its  surest  landmarks,  and  aR  its  origi- 
nal altar-fires  about  me. 


■cibyGoogIc 


100  FREEDOM   NATIONAL,   SLAVERY   SECTION AL  : 

And  now,  on  tlie  very  tliresliold,  I  encounter  the 
ofcjeotion,  that  there  is  a  final  settlement,  in  pniieiple 
and  suhstance,  of  the  question  of  Slavery,  and  that  all 
discussion  of  it  ia  closed.  Both  the  old  political  par- 
ties, by  formal  resolutions,  in  recent  conventions  at  Bal- 
timore, have  united  in  this  declaration.  On  a  subject 
which  for  years  has  agitated  the  public  mind,  wliich 
yet  palpitates  in  every  heart  and  burns  on  every  tongue, 
which  in  its  immeasurable  importance  dwarfs  all  other 
subjects,  wliich  by  its  constant  and  gigantic  presence 
throws  a  shadow  across  these  halls,  which  at  this  very 
time  calls  for  appropriations  to  meet  extraordiaaiy  ex- 
penses it  has  caused,  they  impose  the  rale  of  silence. 
According  to  them.  Sir,  we  may  speak  of  everything 
except  that  alone  which  is  most  present  in  all  our 
minds. 

To  this  combined  effort  I  might  ti%  reply,  that,  witli 
flagrant  inconsistency,  it  challenges  tlie  veiy  discussion  it 
pretends  to  forbid.  Their  very  declaration,  on  the  eve  of 
an  election,  is,  of  course,  submitted  to  the  consideration 
and  ratification  of  the  people.  Debate,  inquiry,  discus- 
sion, are  the  necessary  consequence.  Silence  becomes 
impossible.  Slavery,  which  you  profess  to  banish  from 
public  attention,  openly  by  your  invitation  enters  every 
political  meeting  and  .every  political  convention.  Nay, 
at  this  moment  it  stalts  into  this  Senate,  crying,  like 
the  daughters  of  the  horseleech,  "  Give !  give ! " 

But  no  unanimity  of  poKticians  can  uphold  the  base- 
less assumption,  that  a  law,  or  any  conglomerate  of 
laws,  under  the  name  of  Compromise,  or  howsoever 
called,  is  final.  Nothing  can  be  plainer  than  this,  — 
that  by  no  parliamentary  device  or  knot  can  any  Legis- 
lature tie  the  hands  qf  a  succeeding  L^slature,  so  as  to 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  THE   FUGITIVE  SLAVE   ACT.  101 

prevent  the  full  exereiae  of  its  constitutional  powers. 
Each  Legislature,  under  a  just  sense  of  its  responsibil- 
ity, must  judge  for  itself;  and  if  it  think  proper,  it 
may  revise,  or  amend,  or  absolutely  undo  the  work  of 
any  predecessor.  The  laws  of  the  Medes  and  Persians 
are  said  proverbially  to  have  been  unalterable ;  but  they 
stand  forth  in  history  as  a  single  example  where  the 
true  principles  of  all  law  have  been  so  uTationaUy 
defied. 

To  malie  a  law  final,  so  as  not  to  be  reached  by  Con- 
gress, is,  by  mere  legislation,  to  fasten  a  new  provision 
on  the  Constitution.  Nay,  more ;  it  gives  to  the  law  a 
character  which  the  very  Constitution  does  not  possess. 
The  wise  Fathers  did  not  treat  the  country  as  a  Chinese 
foot,  never  to  grow  after  infancy ;  but,  anticipating  pro- 
gress, they  declared  expressly  that  theii'  great  Act  is  not 
final  According  to  the  Constitution  itself,  there  is  not 
one  of  its  existing  provisions  —  not  even  that  with  re- 
gard to  fi^itives  from  labor —  wldch  may  not  at  all 
times  he  reached  by  amendment,  and  thus  be  drawn 
into  debate.  This  ia  rational  and  just.  Sir,  nothing 
from  man's  hands,  nor  law  nor  constitution,  can  be  final. 
Truth  alone  is  final 

Inconsistent  and  absurd,  this  efibrt  is  tyrannical  also. 
The  responsibility  for  the  recent  Slave  Act,  and  for 
Slavery  everywhere  within  the  jurisdiction  of  Congress, 
necessarily  involves  the  right  to  discuss  them.  To  sep- 
arate these  is  impossible.    Like  the  twenty-fifth  rule  *  of 

'  Originally  tho  twoiilj-first,  adopted  January  28,  1840  (2Bili  Cong.  Ist 
Sess.),  by  Y«as  114,  Nays  108  ;  rescinded,  on  motion  of  John  Quiiioy 
Adams,  December  3,  1844  (a8th  Cong.  2d  Sess),  by  Yasa  108,  Nays  80. 
It  will  be  observed  that  ihe  vote  oi  (he  opponents  of  the  rule  was  precisely 
the  same  (lOSj  on  its  adoption  as  on  its  abrogation.  Obviously  many  of 
tlie  original  Bupporters  or  their  enopeaaors  withheld  tbair  votes  ou  thp  latt^ 


■cibyGoogIc 


102  rEEEDOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVERY   SECTIONAL: 

the  House  of  Eepresentatives  against  petitions  on  Slav- 
ery, —  now  repealed  and  dishonored,  —  the  Coiupi-omise, 
as  explained  and  uiged,  is  a  curtailment  of  the  actual 
powers  of  legislation,  and  a  perpetual  denial  of  the  in- 
disputable principle,  that  the  right  to  deliberate  is  coex- 
tensive with  the  responsibility  for  an  act.  To  sustain 
Slavery,  it  is  now  proposed  to  trample  on  free  speech. 
In  any  country  this  would  be  grievous ;  but  here,  where 
the  Constitution  expi-essly  provides  against  abridging 
freedom  of  speech,  it  is  a  special  outi'age.  In  vain  do 
we  condemn  the  despotisms  of  Europe,  wbde  we  borrow 
the  rigors  with  which  they  repress  Liberty,  and  guard 
their  own  uncertain  power.  I'or  myself,  in  no  factious 
spirit,  but  solemnly  and  in  loyalty  to  the  Constitu- 
tion, as  a  Senator  of  tlie  United  States,  representing  a 
free  Commonwealth,  I  protest  against  tliis  wrong.  On 
Slavery,  as  on  every  other  subject,  I  claim  the  right 
to  be  heard.  Tliat  right  I  cannot,  I  will  not  abandon. 
"Give  me  the  liberty  to  know,  to  utter,  and  to  ai^e 
&eely  according  to  conscience,  above  all  liberties " : ' 
these  are  glowing  words,  flashed  from  the  sonl  of  John 
Milton  in  his  struggles  with  English  tyranny.  With 
equal  fervor  they  should  be  echoed  now  by  eveiy  Amer- 
ican not  already  a  slave. 

But,  Sir,  this  effort  is  impotent  as  tyrannical.  Con- 
victions of  the  heart  cannot  be  repressed.  Utterances 
of  conscience  must  be  heard.  They  break  forth  with 
irrepressible  might.    As  well  attempt  to  check  the  tides 

occasion.  Tha  mle  in  question  was  In  (hess  words  ;  "  No  petition,  memorial, 
resolution,  or  other  paper,  praying  tha  abolition  ol  slavery  5n  llie  District  ol 
Columbia,  or  any  State  or  Territory,  or  the  slave-trade  lietween  tlie  States 
or  Territories  of  the  United  Stntas  in  wliich  it  now  exists,  stall  be  received 
by  this  House,  or  entertninad  in  nny  way  whatever." 

1  Miltois.  AreopaniticK ;  A  Speeoli  for  tha  Liberty  of  Unlicensed  Printing: 
Prose  Works,  ed.  Synimons,  Vol.  1.  p.  336. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL   OF   THE    FUGITIVE    SLAVE   ACT.  103 

of  Ocean,  the  currents  of  the  Mississippi,  or  the  rushii^ 
waters  of  Miagara.  The  discussion  of  Slavery  will  pro- 
ceed, -wherever  two  or  three  are  gathered  together,  —  by 
the  iireside,  on  the  highway,  at  the  puhlic  meeting,  in 
the  church.  The  movement  against  Slavery  is  from  the 
Everlasting  Ama,  Even  now  it  is  gathering  its  forces, 
soon  to  be  confessed  everywhere.  It  may  not  be  felt 
yet  in  the  high  places  of  office  and  power,  but  aU  vfho 
can  put  tiieir  ears  humbly  to  the  gTOund  will  hear  and 
comprehend  its  incessant  and  advancing  tread. 

The  relations  of  the  National  Government  to  Slavery, 
though  plain  and  obvions,  are  constantly  misunderstood. 
A  popular  behef  at  this  moment  makes  Slavery  a  na- 
tional institution,  and  of  course  renders  its  support 
a  national  duty.  The  extmvagance  of  this  error  can 
hardly  be  surpassed:  An  institution  which  our  fathers 
most  carefully  omitted  to  name  in  the  Constitution, 
which,  according  to  the  debates  in  the  Convention,  they 
refused  to  cover  with  any  "  sanction,"  and  which,  at  the 
or^nal  •  oi^anization  of  the  Government,  was  merely 
sectional,  existing  nowhere  on  the  national  territory,  is 
now,  above  all  other  tilings,  blazoned  as  national.  Its 
supporters  pride  themselves  as  national.  The  old  po- 
litical parties,  while  upholding  it,  claim  to  be  national 
A  National  Whig  is  simply  a  Slavery  Whig,  and  a  Na- 
tional Democrat  is  simply  a  Slavery  Democrat,  in  oon- 
ti'adistinction  to  all  who  regard  Slavery  as  a  sectional 
institution,  within  the  exclusive  control  of  the  States, 
and  with  wliich  the  nation  has  nothing  to  do. 

As  Slavery  assumes  to  be  national,  so,  by  an  equally 
strange  pei^version,  Ei'eedom  is  degraded  to  be  sectional, 
and  all  who  uphold  it,  under  tlie  National  Constitution, 
are  made  to  share  this  same  epithet.     Honest  effoite  to 


■cibyGoogIc 


104  FREEDOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVERY    SECTIONAL  : 

secure  its  blessings  everywhere  witbiii  Gie  jurisdiction 
of  Congress  are  scouted  as  sectional ;  and  this  cause, 
which  the  founders  of  our  National  Government  had  so 
miicb  at  heart,  is  called  Sectionalism.  These  terms,  now 
belonging  to  the  commonplaces  of  political  speech,  are 
adopted  and  misapplied  by  most  persons  without  reflec- 
tion. But  here  is  tlie  power  of  Slavery.  According  to 
a  curious  tradition  of  the  French  language,  Louis  the 
Foiuteenth,  the  Grand  Monarch,  by  an  accidental  error 
of  speech,  among  supple  courtiers,  changed  tlie  gender 
of  a  noim.  But  Slavery  does  more.  It  changes  word 
for  word.  It  teaches  men  to  say  -national  instead  of  sec- 
tional, and  sectional  instead  of  national. 

Slavery  national !  Sir,  tliis  is  a  mistake  and  absurd- 
ity, fit  to  have  a  place  in  some  new  collection  of  Vul- 
gar Errors,  by  some  other  Sir  Thomas  Browne,  with 
tlie  ancient,  but  exploded  stories,  that  the  toad  has  a 
gem  in  its  head,  and  that  ostriches  digest  iron.  Ac- 
cordii^  to  the  true  spirit  of  the  Constitution,  a,nd  the 
sentiments  of  the  Fathers,  Slavery,  and  not  Freedom,  is 
sectional,  while  Freedom,  and  not  Slavery,  is  national. 
On  this  unanswerable  proposition  I  take  my  stand,  and 
here, commences  my  argument. 

The  subject  presents  itself  under  two  principal  heads : 
first,  the  true  relations  of  tlie  National  Grovemment  to 
Slaver?;,  wherein  it  will  appear  that  there  la  no  national 
fountain  from  which  Slavery  can  be  derived,  and  no 
national  power,  under  the  Constitution,  by  which  it  can 
be  supported.  Enhghtened  by  this  general  survey,  we 
shall  be  prepared  to  consider,  secondly,  the  true  nature 
of  tlte  provision  for  tlie  rendition  of  fu^itims  from  service, 
and  herein  especially  the  unconstitutional  and  offensive 
legislation  of  Congress  in  pursuance  thereof. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT, 


And  now  for  THE  teue  relations  of  the  National 
Government  to  Slavery.  These  are  readily  apparent, 
if  we  do  not  neglect  well-established  principles. 

If  Slavery  he  national,  if  there  he  any  power  in  the 
National  Government  to  uphold  this  institution,— as  in 
the  recent  Slave  Act, — it  must  be  by  virtue  of  tlie  Con- 
stitution. Nor  can  it  be  by  mere  inference,  implication, 
or  conjecture.  According  to  the  uniform  admission  of 
courts  and  jurists  in  Europe,  again  and  again  promul^ 
gated  in  our  country.  Slavery  can  be  derived  only  from 
clear  and  special  recognition.  "  The  state  of  Slavery," 
said  Lord  Mansfield,  pronouncing  judgment  in  the  great 
case  of  Sommersett,  "is  of  such  a  nature,  that  it  is  in- 
capable of  being  introduced  on  any  reasons,  moral  or 
political,  but  only  by  positive  law.  ....  It  is  so  odioxis, 
that  noihi'og  can  he  suffered  to  support  it  but  positive 
LAW."*  And  a  slaveholding  tribunal,  —  the  Supreme 
Court  of  Mississippi,- — adopting  the  same  principle, 
has  said:  — 

"  Slavery  is  condemned  by  reason  and  the  Laws  of  Na- 
ture. It  exists,  and  can  <mly  exist,  through  municipal  regu- 
latious."  ^ 

And  another  slaveholding  tribunal — the  Court  of  Ap- 
peals of  Kentucky  —  has  said :  — 

"  We  view  this  as  a  right  esisting  by  po^ive  lata  of  a  mu- 
nicipal character,  without  foundation  in  the  I^w  of  Nature 
or  the  unwritten  and  Common  Law."  ' 

Of  course  every  power  to  uphold  Slavery  must  have 

■  Howell's  state  TrMa,  Vol.  XX.  col.  62. 
2  Harry  et  fll.  «.  Deciiar  et  al.,  Walker,  42. 
<  Runkin  I.  Lydia,  2  Marsliidl,  4T0. 


■cibyGoogIc 


106         FEEEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

an  origin  as  distinct  as  that  of  Slavery  itself  Eiery 
presiunption  must  te  as  strong  against  bui^li  a  power 
as  against  Slavery.  A  power  so  peculiar  and  oifensive, 
so  hostile  to  reason,  so  repiignant  to  the  Law  of  Nature 
and  the  inborn  Eights  of  Man,  —  which  despoils  its  vic- 
tim of  the  fruits  of  labor,  —  which  substitutes  concubin- 
age for  marriage,  —  which  abrogates  the  relation  of  par- 
ent and  child,  —  which,  by  denial  of  education,  abases 
the  intellect,  prevents  a  true  knowledge  of  God,  and 
murders  the  very  soul,  —  which,  amidst  a  plausible 
physical  comfort,  degrades  man,  created  iu  the  divine 
image,  to  the  state  of  a  beast,  —  such  a  power,  so  emi- 
nent, so  transcendent,  so  tyrannical,  so  unjust,  can  find 
no  place  in  any  system  of  Government,  unless  by  virtue 
of  positive  sanction.  It  can  spring  from  no  doubtful 
phrase.  It  must  be  declared  by  unambiguous  words, 
incapable  of  a  double  sense. 

Slavery,  I  repeat,  is  not  mentioned  in  the  Constitution. 
The  name  Slave  does  not  pollute  this  Charter  of  our 
Liberties.  No  "positive"  language  gives  to  Congress 
any  power  to  make  a  slave  or  to  hunt  a  slave.  To  find 
even  any  seeming  sanction  for  either,  we  must  travel, 
with  doubtfitl  footstep,  beyond  express  letter,  into  the 
r^on  of  interpretation  But  here  are  rules  which  can- 
not be  disobeyed.  Witli  electric  miglit  for  Freedom, 
they  send  a  pervasive  influence  through  every  provis- 
ion, clause,  and  word  of  the  Constitution.  Each  and  all 
make  Slavery  impossible  as  a  national  institution.  They 
shut  off  from  the  Constitution  every  fountain  out  of 
wluch  it  can  be  derived. 

Mrst,  and  foremost,  is  the  Preamble.  This  discloses 
the  pi'cvailing  objects  and  principles  of  the  Constitu- 
tion,    Tliis  is   tlie  vestibule  through  which  all  must 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT,  107 

pass  wlio  would  enter  the  sacred  temple.  Here  are  the 
iiiacriptions  by  which  they  are  earliest  impreisaed.  Here 
is  first  seen  the  genius  of  the  place.  Here  the  procla- 
mation of  Liberty  ia  soonest  heard.  "We,  tlie  People 
of  the  United  States,"  says  the  Preamble,  "in  order 
to  form  a  more  perfect  Union,  estallish  Justice,  insure 
domestic  tranquillity,  provide  for  the  common  defence, 
provwte  the  general  welfare,  and  secure  the  blessings  of 
Liberty  to  ourselves  and  our  posterity,  do  ordain  and 
establiah  this  Constitution  for  the  United  States  of 
America."  Thus,  according  to  undeniable  words,  the 
Constitution  was  ordained,  not  to  establish,  secure,  or 
sanction  Slavery,  —  not  to  promote  the  special  interests 
of  Slaveholders,  —  not  to  make  Slavery  national,  in  any 
way,  form,  or  manner, — but  to  "  establish  justice,"  "  pro- 
mote tbe  general  welfare,"  and  "secure  the  blessings  of 
Liberty."     Here,  surely,  Liberty  is  national. 

Secondly.  Next  to  the  Preamble  in  importance  are 
the  explicit  eontemporaneom  declarations  iu  the  Con- 
vention which  framed  the  Constitution,  and  elsewhere, 
expressed  in  different  forms  of  language,  but  aU  tending 
to  the  same  conclusion.  By  the  Preamble  the  Consti- 
tution speaks  for  Preedom.  By  tliese  declarations  the 
Fathers  speak  as  the  Constitution  speaks.  Early  in  the 
Convention,  Gouvemeur  Morris,  of  Pennsylvania,  broke 
fortli  in  fhe  language  of  an  Abolitionist:  "Re  never 
would  concur  in  ■u^holdi'ng  domestic  slavery.  It  was  a 
nefarious  institution.  If  was  the  curse  of  Heaven  on 
the  States  where  it  prevailed."  ^  These  positive  words, 
in  harmony  with  other  things  from  the  same  quarter, 
show  a  vehement  determination  that  Slavery  should  not 
be  national. 

■■  Madison's  Debates,  August  8,  I7S7. 


;db,Googlc 


108         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,   SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

At  a  later  day  a  discussion  ensued  on  the  clause 
touching  the  African  slave-trade,  -which  reveals  the 
definitive  purposes  of  the  Convention,  From  the  re- 
port of  Mr.  Madiaon  we  learn  what  was  said.  Oliver 
Ellsworth,  of  Connecticut,  said :  "The  morality  or  wis- 
dom of  Slavery  are  considerations  belonging  to  the  States 
themselves."  ^  According  to  him,  Shivery  was  sectional 
Elbridge  Gerry,  oi'  Massaohusetts,  "  thought  wo  had  noth- 
ing to  do  with  the  conduct  of  the  States  as  to  slaves,  hut 
owffht  to  be  careful  not  to  give  any  sanction  to  it."  ^  Ac- 
cording to  him.  Slavery  is  sectional,  and  he  would  not 
make  it  national  Roger  Sherman,  of  Connecticut,  "was 
opposed  to  a  tax  on  slaves  imported,  as  mailing  the  mat- 
ter worse,  iecame  it  implied  they  were  pr(^erty."  *  He 
would  not  have  Slavery  national.  After  debate,  the  sub- 
ject was  referred  to  a  committee  of  eleven  who  reported 
a  substitute,  authorizing  "a  tix  or  duty  on  such  migra- 
tion or  imiwrtation,  at  a  rate  n  (  exceeding  the  average  of 
the  duties  laid  on.  imports."*  This  language  classifying 
persons  with  merchandise,  seeme  1  to  imply  a  recognition 
that  they  were  property.  Mr.  Sheiman  at  once  declared 
himself  "  against  this  part,  as  acknotoledging  rnen  to  be 
property,  by  taxing  them  as  such  under  the  character  of 
slaves."^  Mr.  Gorham  "thought  that  Mr.  Sherman 
should  consider  the  duty,  not  as  implying  that  slaves  are 
property,  but  as  a  discouragement  to  the  importation  of 
them."  ^  Mr.  Madison,  in  mild  jxnidicai  phrase, "  thought 
it  wrong  to  admit  in  the  Constitution  the  idea  that  there 
could  he  property  in  men."  ^  After  discussion  it,  was 
iinally  agreed  to  make  the  clause  read :  — 


■cibyGoogIc 


KEPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  109 

"  But  a  tax  or  duty  may  be  imposed  on  such  importation, 
not  exceeding  ten  dollars /or  each  persmi."  ^ 

Tlie  difficulty  seemed  then  to  be  removed,  and  the 
■whole  clause  was  adopted.  This  record  demonstrates 
that  the  woi-d  "persons"  was  employed  to  show  that 
slaves,  everywhere  under  the  Constitution,  are  always 
to  be  regarded  as  pin-sons,  and  not  as  pro^ierty,  and  thus 
to  exclude  from  the  Constitution  all  idea  that  there  can 
be  property  in  man.  Itemember  well,  that  Mr.  Sher- 
man -was  opposed  to  the  clause  in  its  original  form,  "as 
acknowledging  men  to  be  property;'  —  that  Mr.  Madison 
was  also  opposed  to  it,  because  he  "  thought  it  mrmg  to 
admit  in  the  Constitution  the  idea  that  there  could  be 
property  in  men,"  —and  that,  after  these  objections,  the 
clause  was  so  amended  as  to  exclude  the  idea.  But 
Slavery  cannot  be  national,  unless  this  idea  is  distinctly 
and  unequivocally  admitted  into  the  Constitution. 

The  evidence  still  accumulates.  At  a  later  day  in 
the  proceedings  of  the  Convention,  as  if  to  set  the  seal 
upon  the  solemn  determination  to  have  no  sanction  of 
Slavery  in  the  Constitution,  the  word  "  servitude,"  which 
appeared  in  the  clause  on  the  apportionment  of  repre- 
sentatives and  taxes  was  struck  out,  and  the  word  "  ser- 
vice "  inserted.  This  was  done  by  unanimous  vote,  on 
the  motion  of  Mr.  Eandolph,  of  Virginia  ;  and  the  rea- 
son assigned  for  this  substitution,  accovdii^  to  Mr. 
Madison,  in  his  authentic  report  of  the  debate,  was,  that 
"the  former  was  thought  to  express  the  condition  of 
slaves,  and  the  latter  the  ohligations  of  free  persons."^ 
With  such  care  was  Slavery  excluded  from  tlie  Consti- 
tution. 


■cibyGoogIc 


110  FltEKDOM    NATIONAL,    SLAVEEY    SECTIONAL: 

I^or  is  this  all.  In  the  Massachusettg  Convention,  to 
whicli  the  Constitution,  when  completed,  was  submitted 
Jot  ratification,  a  veteran  of  the  Eevolution,  General 
Heath,  openly  declared,  that,  according  to  his  view, 
Slavery  was  sectional,  and  not  national.  His  language 
was  pointed.  "I  apprehend,"  he  said,  "that  it  is  not  in 
our  power  to  do  anything  for  or  a^aimt  those  -who  are 
in  slavery  in  the  Southern  States.  Ilfo  gentleman  within 
these  walls  detests  every  idea  of  Slaveiy  more  than  I 
do  ;  it  is  generally  detested  by  the  people  of  this  Com- 
monwealth ;  and  I  ardently  hope  that  the  time  will  soon 
come  when  our  brethren  in  the  Southern  States  wiE 
view  it  as  we  do,  and  put  a  stop  to  it ;  but  to  this  we 
have  no  right  to  compel  them.  Two  questions  naturally 
arise:  If  we  ratify  ike  Constitution,  shall  we  do  anything 
by  our  act  to  hold  the  blacks  in  slavery  ?  or  sJiall  we  he- 
come  partakers  of  other  men's  sins  ?  I  think  neither  of 
them."  ^ 

Afterwards,  in  the  first  Congress  under  the  Constitu- 
tion, on  a  motion,  much  debated,  for  a  duty  on  the  im- 
portation of  slaves,  the  same  Eoger  Sherman,  who  in 
the  National  Convention  opposed  the  idea  of  property 
in  man,  authoritatively  exposed  the  true  relations  of 
the  Constitution  to  Slavery.  His  language  was,  that 
"  the  Constitution  does  not  consider  these  persons  as  a 
species  of  property ;  it  speaks  of  them  as  persons."  ^ 

Tlius  distinctly  and  constantly,  from  the  very  lips  of 
the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  we  learn  the  falsehood 
of  recent  assumptions  in  favor  of  Slavery  and  in  deroga- 
tion of  Freedom. 

1  Debates,  Eosolutions,  etc.,  of  the  Coiiveiidon  of  Massachusetts,  Jannarj 
SO,  1788. 
3  Amials  of  Congress,  1st  Cong,  1st  Sess.,  col.  843. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EKPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLATE  ACT.     Ill 

Thirdly.  According  to  a  familiar  rule  of  interpreta- 
tion, aU  laws  concerning  the  same  matter,  in  pari  ma- 
teria, are  to  be  construed  together.  By  the  same  reason, 
tks  gratid  political  acts  of  the  Nation  are  to  he  construed 
together,  giving  and  receiving  light  from  each  other. 
Earlier  than  the  Constitution  was  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  embodying,  in  immortal  words,  those 
primal  truths  to  which  our  country  pledged  itself  with 
baptismal  vows  as  a  N'ation.  "  We  hold  these  truths  to 
be  self-evident,"  says  the  Nation ;  "  that  aU  men  are 
created  equal ;  that  they  are  endowed  by  their  Creator 
with  certain  unaHenable  rights ;  that  among  these  are 
life,  liberty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness;  that  to  secure 
these  rights  governments  are  instituted  among  men, 
deriving  their  just  powers  from  the  consent  of  the  gov- 
erned." But  this  does  not  stand  alone.  There  is  an- 
other national  act  of  similar  import.  On  the  successful 
close  of  the  Eevolution,  the  Continental  Congress,  in  an 
Address  to  the  States,  repeated  the  same  lofty  truth. 
"  Let  it  be  remembered,"  said  the  Nation  again,  "  that  it 
has  ever  been  the  pride  and  boast  of  America,  that  the 
rigMs  for  which  she  contended  were  the  rights  of  human 
natv/re.  By  the  blessing  of  the  Author  of  these  rights 
on  the  means  ex'erted  for  their  defence,  they  have  pre- 
vailed against  aU  opposition,  and  form  the  basis  of 
thirteen  independent  States."^  Such  were  the  acts 
of  the  Nation  in  its  united  capacity.  Whatever  may 
be  the  privileges  of  States  in  their  individual  capaci- 
ties, within  their  several  local  jurisdictions,  no  power 
can  he  attributed  to  the  Nation,  in  the  absence  of 
positive,  nnecLuivocal  gr^t,  inconsistent  with  these  two 
national  declarations.     Here,  Sir,  is  the  national  heart, 

1  Jonnml  of  Congress,  April  29, 17S3,  Vol  VIII.  p.  201. 


■cibyGoogIc 


112         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,   SLAVEEY   SECTIONAL: 

the  national  soul,  the  national  wUI,  the  national  voice, 
which  must  inspire  our  interpretation  of  tlie  Consti- 
tution, entering  into  all  the  national  legislation  and 
spreading  throt^h  all  its  parts.  Tlius  again  ia  Freedom 
national 

Fourthly.  Beyond  these  is  a  principle  of  the  Com- 
mon Law,  clear  and  indisputable,  a  supreme  rule  of 
interpretation,  from  which  in  this  case  there  can  be  no 
appeal.  In  any  question  under  the  Constitution  ewery 
word  mvst  he  construed  in  fawr  of  Liberty.  This  rule, 
which  commends  itself  to  the  natural  reason,  is  sus- 
tained by  time-honored  maxims  of  early  jm'isprudence. 
Blackstone  aptly  expresses  it,  when  he  sajra  that  "  the 
law  is  always  ready  to  catch  at  anything  in  favor  of 
Liberty."^  The  rule  is  repeated  in  various  forma. 
Favores  ampliandi  svM;  odia  restrin^enda :  "Favors 
are  to  be  ampliiied ;  hateful  things  to  be  restrained." 
Lex  Angliw  est  lex  misericordiw:  "The  law  of  Eng- 
land is  a  law  of  mercy."  Anglim  jura  in  omni  casu 
Libertati  dantfavorem:  "The  laws  of  England  in  ev- 
ery case  show  iavor  to  Liberty."  And  this  sentiment 
bi'eaks  forth  in  natural,  though  intense  force,  in  the 
maxim,  Impius  et  cruddis  judieandus  est  qwi  Libertati 
non  favet :  "  He  is  to  be  adjudged  impious  and  cruel 
who  does  not  favor  Liberty."  Eeading  the  Constitution 
in.  the  admonition  of  these  rules.  Freedom,  again  I  say, 
ia  national,^ 

1  CommeiitBries,  Vol.  II.  p.  94. 

3  Thesa  maxinie  are  enrarced  with  beautiful  earnestness  in  a  tract  which 
appeared  at  Baltimore  shortly  after  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  with 
the  following  title-page:  "Letter  fram  GrauYiile  Sharp,  Esq.,  of  London,  to 
Ibe  Maryland  Society  for  Pi-omoting  the  Abolition  of  Slavery  nnd  the  Belief 
of  Free  Negroes  and  others  unlawfully  held  in&ondnge.  Published  by  Order 
of  the  Society.  Baltimore  :  Printed  by  D.  GrahHm,  L.  Yundt,  and  W.  Pat- 
ton,  in  Calvert  Street,  near  the  Court-House.     M.DCC.XCIIL" 


■cibyGoogIc 


EBFEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  113 

Fifthly.  From  a  learned  judge  of  the  Supreme  Court 
of  the  United  States,  in  an  opinion  of  the  Court,  we 
derive  the  same  lesson.  lu  considering  the  question, 
whether  a  State  can  prohibit  the  importation  of  slaves 
as  merchandise,  and  whether  Congress,  in  the  exercise 
of  its  power  to  regulate  commerce  among  the  States, 
can  interfere  with  the  slave-trade  between  the  States,  a 
principle  was  enunciated,  which,  while  protecting  the 
trade  from  any  intervention  of  Congress,  declares  openly 
that  the  Constitution  acts  upon  no  man  as  property, 
Mr.  Justice  McLean  says :  "  If  slaves  are  considered  in 
some  of  the  States  as  merchandise,  that  cannot  divest 
them  of  the  leading  and  controlling  quality  of  persons, 
by  which  they  are  designated  in  the  Constitution.  The 
character  of  property  is  given  them  by  the  local  law. 
This  law  ia  respected,  and  all  rights  under  it  are  pro- 
tected, by  the  Federal  authorities ;  hut  the  Constitution 
acts  -upon  slaves  as  PERSONS,  and  Twt  as  property.  .... 
The  power  over  Slavery  belongs  to  the  States  respec- 
tively. It  is  local  in  its  character,  and  in  its  effects."  ^ 
Here  again  Slavery  ia  sectional,  while  Freedom  is  na- 
tional 

Sir,  such,  briefly,  are  the  rules  of  interpretation,  which, 
as  applied  to  the  Constitution,  fill  it  with  the  breath  of 
Fre 


"  Driving  for  off  aach  thing  of  sin  and  guiit."  a 
To  the  history  and  prmaUing  sentiments  of  the  times 
we  may  turn  for  further  assurance.     In  the  spirit  of 
Freedom  the  Constitution  was  formed.     In  thig  spirit 
our  fathers  always  spolio  and  acted.     In  this  spirit  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


114  FREEDOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVERY   SECTIONAL: 

National  (Tovemment  was  first  organized  under  Wash- 
ington. And  here  I  recall  a  scene,  in  itself  a  touch- 
atone  of  the  period,  and  an  example  for  us,  upon  which 
we  may  look  with  pure  national  pride,  while  we  learn 
anew  the  relations  of  the  National  Government  to  Sla- 
very. 

The  Eevolution  was  accomphshed.  The  feeMe  Grov- 
emment  of  the  Confederation  passed  away.  The  Con- 
stitution, slowly  matured  in  a  National  Convention, 
discussed  before  the  people,  defended  by  masterly  pens, 
was  adopted.  The  Thirteen  States  stood  forth  a  Na- 
tion, where  was  unity  without  eonsoUdation,  and  diver- 
sity without  discord.  The  hopes  of  all  were  anxiously 
hanging  upon  the  new  order  of  things  and  the  mighty 
procession  of  events.  With  signal  unanimity  Wash- 
ington was  chosen  President.  Leaving  his  home  at 
Mount  Vernon,  lie  repaired  to  New  York,  —  where 
the  first  Congress  had  commenced  its  session,  —  to  as- 
sume his  place  as  elected  Chief  of  the  Eepubhc  On 
the  30th  of  April,  1789,  the  organization  of  the  Gov- 
ernment was  completed  by  his  inauguration.  Entering 
the  Senate  Chamber,  where  the  two  Houses  were  assem- 
bled, he  was  informed  that  they  awaited  his  readiness 
to  receive  the  oath  of  office.  Without  delay,  attended 
by  the  Senators  and  Representatives,  with  friends  and 
men  of  mark  gathered  about  him,  he  moved  to  the  bal- 
cony in  front  of  the  edifice.  A  countless  multitude, 
thronging  the  open  ways,  and  eagerly  watehii^  this 
great  espousal, 

"  With  reverence  look  on  his  majestic  face, 
Proud  to  be  less,  Irnt  of  his  godlike  race."  ' 

Tlie  oath  was  administered  by  the  Chancellor  of  New 
1  Drvfleii,  Epistle  XVI.  [  X1V.1,  To  Sir  Godfrey  KHellei^. 


■cibyGoogIc 


KEPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  115 

York.  At  such  time,  and  in-  such  presence,  beneath  the 
unveiled  heavens,  Washington  first  took  this  vow  upon 
his  lips :  "  I  do  solemnly  swear  that  I  will  faithfully 
execute  the  ofiiee  of  President  of  the  United  States,  and 
will,  to  the  best  of  my  ability,  preserve,  protect,  and  de- 
fend the  Constitution  of  the  United  States." 

Over  the  President,  on  this  new  occasion,  floated  the 
national  flag,  with  its  stripes  of  red  and  white,  its  atara 
on  a  field  of  blue.  As  his  patriot  eye  rested  upon  the 
glowing  ensign,  what  currents  must  have  rushed  swiftly 
through  his  soul !  In  the  early  days  of  the  Revolution, 
in  those  darkest  hours  ahont  Boston,  after  the  Battle 
of  Bunker  Hill,  and  before  the  Declaration  of  Indepen- 
dence, the  thirteen  stripes  had  been  first  unfurled  by 
him,  OS  the  emblem  of  Union  among  the  Colonies  for  the 
sake  of  Freedom.  By  him,  at  that  time,  they  had  been 
named  the  Union  Flag.  Ti-ial,  struggle,  and  war  were 
now  ended,  and  the  Union,  which,  they  first  heralded, 
was  unalterably  established.  To  every  beholder  these 
memories  must  have  been  full  of  pride  and  consolation. 
But,  looking  back  upon  the  scene,  there  is  one  circum- 
stance which,  more  than  all  its  other  associations,  fills 
the  soul,— more  even  than  the  suggestions  of  Union, 
which  I  prize  so  much.  At  this  moment,  when  Wash- 
ington TOOK  HIS  PIRST  OATH  TO  SUPPORT  THE  CON- 
STITUTION" OF  THE  United  States,  the  National 
Ensign,  nowhere  within  the  National  Teeeitory, 
COVERED  A  single  SLAVE.  Then,  indeed,  was  Slavery 
Sectional,  and  Freedom  National. 

On  tlie  sea  an  execrable  piracy,  the'  trade  in  slaves, 
to  the  national  scandal,  was  still  tolerated  under  the 
national  flag.  In  the  States,  as  a  sectional  institution, 
.  the  shelter  of  local  laws,  Slavery  unhappily 


■cibyGoogIc 


116         FREEDOM  NATXONAL,  SLA.VEEY   SECTIONAL: 

found  a  home.  But  in  the  only  territories  at  this  time 
belonging  to  the  nation,  the  hroad  region  of  the  North- 
west, it  was  already  m^e  impossible,  by  the  Ordinance 
of  Freedom,  even  before  the  adoption  of  the  Constitu- 
tion. The  District  of  Columbia,  mth  its  Fatal  Dowry, 
was  not  yet  acquired. 

The  government  thus  organized  was  Antislavery  in 
character.  Washington  was  a  slaveholder,  but  it  would 
be  unjust  to  his  memory  not  to  say  tliat  he  was  an 
Abolitionist  also.  His  opinions  do  not  admit  of  ques- 
tion. Only  a  short  time  before  the  formation  of  the 
National  Constitution,  he  declared,  by  letter,  that  it  was 
"among  his  first  wishes  to  see  some  plan  adopted  by 
"which  Slavery  in  this  country  might  be  abolished  by 
law  " ;  ^  and  again,  in  another  letter,  that,  in  support  of 
any  legislative  measure  for  the  abolition  of  Slavery,  his 
suffrage  should  "never  be  wanting";^  and  still  further, 
in  conversation  with  a  distinguished  European  Aboli- 
tionist, a  travelling  propagandist  of  Freedom,  Eiissot 
de  Warville,  recently  welcomed  to  Mount  Vernon,  he 
openly  announced,  that,  to  promote  this  object  in  Vir- 
ginia, "  he  desired  the  formation  of  a  SociEry,  and  that 
he  would  second  it."^  By  this  authentic  testimony 
he  takes  his  place  with  the  early  patrons  of  Abolition 


By  the  side  of  Washington,  as,  standing  beneath  the 
national  ilag,  he  swore  to  support  the  Constitution,  were 
illustrious  men,  whose  lives  and  recorded  words  now 

1  LetUr  to  John  F.  Mercer,  Septamber  S,  1786;  Writings,  ed.  Sparks, 
Vol.  IX.  p.  159,  note. 
^  Letter  to  Robert  Morris,  April  13,  1T66:  Writings,  ed.  Sparks,  Vol.  IX. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL   OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  117 

rise  in  judgment.  There  was  John  Adams,  the  Vice- 
President,  great  vindicator  and  final  negotiator  of  our 
national  independence,  whose  soul,  flaming  with  Free- 
dom, broke  forth  in  the  early  declaration,  that  "  consent- 
ing to  Slavery  is  a  sacrilegious  breach  of  trust,"  ^  and 
whose  immitigable  hostility  to  this  wrong  is  immortal 
in  his  descendants.  There  also  was  a  companion  in 
arms  and  attached  friend,  of  beautiful  genius,  the  yet 
youthful  and  "  incomparable  "  Hamilton, —  fit  companion 
in  early  glories  and  fame  with  that  darling  of  English 
history.  Sir  Philip  Sidney,  to  whom  the  latter'  epithet 
has  been  reserved,  —  who,  as  member  of  the  Abohtion 
Society  of  New  York,  had  recently  united  in  a  solemn 
petition  for  those  who,  though  "frm  'by  the,  laws  of  God, 
are  held  in  Slaveiy  hy  the  laws  of  this  State."  ^  There,  too, 
was  a  noble  spirit,  of  spotless  virtue,  the  ornament  of 
human  nature,  who,  like  the  sun,  ever  held  an  unerring 
course,  —  John  Jay.  Filling  the  important  post  of  Sec- 
retary for  Foreign  Affairs  under  the  Confederation, 'he 
found  time  to  organize  the  "  Society  for  Promoting  the 
Manumission  of  Slaves  "  in  New  York,  and  to  act  as 
its  President,  until,  by  the  nomination  of  Washington, 
he  became  Chief  Justice  of  the  United  States.  In 
his  sight  Slavery  was  an  "iniquity,"  "a  sin  of  crim- 
son dye,"  against  which  ministers  of  the  Gospel  should 
testify,  and  which  the  Government  should  seek  in 
every  way  to  abohsh.  "  TiU.  America  comes  into  this 
measure,"  he  wrote,  "  her  prayers  to  Heaven  for  liberty 
will  be  impious.  This  is  a  strong  expression,  but  it  is 
just.     Were  I  in  your  Legislature,  I  would  prepare  a 

I  Dissertation  on  tlie  Canon  and  Fendal  Law:  Works,  Vol.  IIL  p.  463. 
"  Lifo  and  Writings  of  John  Jay,  Vol.  I.  p.  281.     Slavery  and  Aiitl. 
Slavery,  by  William  Goodell,  p.  9T. 


■cibyGoogIc 


118         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,   SLAVEEY  SECTIOXAL: 

bOl  for  the  purpose  with  great  care,  and  I  would  never 
cease  moving  it  till  it  became  a  law  or  I  ceased  to  be 
a  member."^  Such  words  as  these,  fitly  coming  from 
our  leaders,  belong  to  the  true  glories  of  the  country :  — 


They  stood  not  alone.  The  convictions  and  i 
aspirations  of  the  country  were  with  them.  At  the 
North  these  were  broad  and  general.  At  the  South 
they  found  fervid  utterance  from  slaveholders.  By  early 
and  precocious  efforts  for  "total  emancipation,"  the  au- 
thor of  the  Declaration  of  Independence  placed  him- 
self foremost  among  the  Abolitionists  of  the  land.  In 
language  now  famihar  to  all,  and  which  can  never  die, 
he  perpetually  denounced  Slavery.  He  exposed  its  per- 
nicious influence  upon  master  as  well  as  slave,  declared 
that  the  love  of  justice  and  the  love  of  country  pleaded 
equally,  for  the  slave,  and  that  "  the  abolition  of  domes- 
tic slavery  was  the  greatest  object  of  desu«."  He  be- 
lieved that  "  the  sacred  side  was  gaining  daily  recruits," 
and  confidently  looked  to  tlie  young  for  the  accomplish- 
ment of  this  good  work.^  In  fitful  sympathy  with  Jef- 
ferson was  another  honored  son  of  Vii^ia,  the  Orator 
of  Liberty,  Patrick  Henry,  who,  while  confessing  that 
ho  was  a  master  of  slaves,  said :  "  I  will  not,  I  cannot 
justify  it.  However  cidpable  my  conduct,  I  will  so  far 
pay  my  devoir  to  Virtue  as  to  own  the  excellence  and 
rectitude  of  her  precepts,  and  lament  my  want  of  eon- 

1  Life  and  Writings,  Vol.  I.  pp.  226,  230. 

a  Notes  ou  Virginia,  QneryXVIir.i  Writings,  Vol.  VIII.  pp.  403,  404. 
Summary  View  of  tliB  Riglits  of  13ritisli  Araeriea  ;  American  Archives, 
4tli  Ser.  Vol.  I.  col  696;  Writings,  Vol.  I.  p.  ISS.  Letter  to  Dr.  Price, 
AQgustT,IT85:  Writings,  Voi.  I.  p.  37T. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  119 

formity  to  them."  ^  At  this  very  period,  in  the  Legisla- 
ture of  Maryland,  on  a  biU.  for  the  relief  of  oppressed 
slaves,  a  young  man,  afterwaixla  by  consummate  learn- 
ing and  foienaic  powers  acknowledged  head  of  the 
American  bar,  William  Pinkney,  in  a  speech  of  earnest, 
truthful  eloc[uence, — better  for  bis  memory  than  even 
his  professional  fame,  —  branded  Slavery  as  "  iiiic[uitous 
and  most  dishonorable,"  "founded  in  a  disgraceful  traf- 
fic," "its  continuance  as  shameful  as  its  origin";  and 
he  openly  declared,  that  "by  the  eternal  principles  of 
natural  justice,  no  master  in  the  State  has  a  right  to 
hold  his  slave  in  bondage  for  a  single  hour."^ 

Thus  at  that  time  spoke  the  Nation.  The  Church 
also  joined  its  voice.  And  here,  amidst  diversities  of 
religious  faith,  it  is  uistructive  to  observe  the  general 
accord.  Quakers  iirst  bore  their  testimony.  At  the 
adoption  of  the  Constitution,  their  whole  body,  under 
the  early  teaching  of  (Jeorge  Fox,  and  by  the  crowning 
exertions  of  Benezet  and  Woolman,  had  become  an  or- 
ganized band  of  AboHtionists,  penetrated  by  the  convic- 
tion that  it  was  unlawful  to  hold  a  feUow-man  in  bond- 
age. Methodists,  numerous,  earnest,  and  faithful,  never 
ceased  by  their  preachers  to  proclaim  the  same  truth. 
Their  rules  in  1788  denounced,  in  formal  lai^age,  "  the 
buying  or  selling  the  bodies  and  souls  of  men,  women, 
or  children,  with  an  intention  to  enslave  them."  ^  The 
words  of  their  great  apostle,  John  Wesley,  were  con- 
stantly repeated.     On  the  eve  of  the  National  Conven- 

1  Letter  to  Robert  Pleasants,  January  18,  ITTB:  GoodloB's  Sonthem 
Platform,  p.  79. 

a  Speeches  in  the  House  of  Delegates  of  Msirjland  in  17BS  Hnd  1789: 
Wheiton's  Life  of  Pinkney,  p.  11;  American  Museum  for  1789,  Vol,  VL 


■cibyGoogIc 


120  FEEEDOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVERY   SECTIONAL  : 

tioii,  that  burning  tract  was  circulated  in  wliich  he 
exposes  American  Slavery  as  "  vileat "  of  the  world,  — 
"such  slavery,  as  is  not  found  amoi^  the  Turks  at 
Algiers";  and  after  declaring  "Liberty  the  right  of 
every  human  creature,"  of  which  "  no  human  law  can 
deprive  him,"  he  pleads,  "  If,  therefore,  you  have ,  any 
regard  to  justice  (to  say  nothing  of  mercy,  nor  the  re- 
vealed law  of  God),  render  uuto  all  their  due.  Give 
liberty  to  whom  liberty  is  due,  —  that  is,  to  every  child 
of  man,  to  every  partaker  of  human  nature."^  At  the 
same  time  the  Presbyterians,  a  powerful  religious  body, 
inspired  by  tlie  principles  of  Jolui  Calvin,  in  more  mod- 
erate language,  but  by  a  public  act,  recorded  their  judg- 
ment, recommending  "  to  all  their  people  to  use  the  most 
prudent  measures,  consistent  with  the  interest  and  the 
state  of  civil  society  in  the  counties  where  they  Kve, 
to  procwe  eventually  the  final  abolition  of  Slaveiy  in 
America."^  The  Congregationalista  of  New  England, 
also  nurtured  in  the  faith  of  John  Calvin,  and  with 
the  hatred  of  Slavery  belonging  to  the  great  Noncon- 
formist, Eichard  Baxter,  were  sternly  united  against  this 
wrong.  As  early  as  1776,  Samuel  Hopkins,  tlieir  emi- 
nent leader  and  divine,  published  his  tract  showing  it 
to  be  the  Duty  and  Interest  of  the  American  Colonies  to 
emancipate  all  their  African  slaves,  and  declaring  that 
Slavery  is  "in  every  instance  wrong,  unrighteotisneas, 
and  oppression,  —  a  very  great  and  cryii^  sin,  — .  there 
being  nothii^  of  the  kind  equal  to  it  on  the  face  of 
the  earth."3  And  in  1791,  shortly  after  the  adoption  of 
the  Constitution,  the  second  Jonathan  Edwards,  a  twice- 

'  ThonghtB  upon  Slavery,  by  John  Wesley,  (London,  1TT4,)  pp.  24, 27. 

*  Minutes  of  the  Synod  of  Xew  York  niitl  PhiUdalpliia,  1787:  Beconls  of 
the  Presbyterian  Church  In  tha  United  Stntes,  p.  B40. 

*  A  Dialogue  concerning  the  Slavery  of  tlie  Africans:  Worlts,  Vol.  11.  p.  562. 


;db,Googlc 


EEPEAL   OF  THE  FUGinVB  SLAVE  ACT.  121 

honored  name,  in  an  elaborate  discourse  often  published, 
called  upon  his  country,  in  "  the  present  blaze  of  light " 
on  the  injustice  of  Slavery,  to  "  prepare  the  way  for  its 
total  abolition."  This  he  gladly  thought  at  hand.  "  If  we 
judge  of  the  future  by  the  past,"  said  the  celebrated 
preacher, "  within  iifty  years  from  this  time  it  will  be  as 
shameful  for  a  man  to  hold  a  negro  slave  as  to  be  guilty 
of  common  robbery  or  theft."  ^ 

Thus,  at  this  time,  the  Church,  in  harmony  with  the 
Nation,  by  its  leading  denominations,  Quakers,  Meth- 
odists, Pi'esbyterians,  and  Congregatioualists,  thundered 
against  Slavery.  The  Colleges  were  in  unison  with 
the  Chvirch.  Har\'ard  University  spoke  by  the  voice  of 
Massachusetts,  which  already  had  ■  abolished  Slavery. 
Dartmouth  Collie,  by  one  of  its  learned  Professors, 
claimed  for  the  slaves  "  an  equal  stanchng,  in  point  of 
privileges,  with  the  whites."  ^  Yale  College,  by  its 
President,  the  eminent  divine,  Ezra  Stiles,  became  the 
head  of  the  Abohtion  Society  of  Connecticut.^  And 
the  University  of  William  and  Mary,  in  Vii^ia,  at 
this  very  -  time  testified  its  sympathy  with  the  cause 
by  conferring  upon  GranviUe  Sharp,  the  acknowledged 
chief  of  British  Abolitionists,  the  honoraiy  degree  of 
Doctor  of  Laws.^ 

The  LiTERATUEE  of  the  land,  such  as  then  existed, 
agreed  with  the  Nation,  the  Church,  and  the  College. 

I  The  Injuetioa  mid  ImpoKoy  of  the  SlavB-Trada,  and  of  the  Slavery  of 
tha  Afrieiins,  (Providence,  17»3,)  pp.  ?T  -  30. 

«  Tyrannical  Libert.v-Men;  A  Discourse  on  Negro  Slavery  in  the  United 
States,  Febniary  19,  1795,  by  MosBs  Fislia,  Tutor  in  Dartmoutli  College. 
Amaricnn  Qnnrterly  Register,  May,  1840,  Weld,  Power  of  Congress  over 
ths  District  of  Colnmbia,  p.  S3. 

'  Kingsley's  Life  of  Stiles :  Sparks's  Amenoan  Biography,  Second  Series, 
Vol.  VI.  p.  611. 

*  Hoare'fl  Memoirs  of  Sharp,  p.  254.    Weld's  Power  of  CongresB,  p.  31. 


;db,Googlc 


122         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,  6LAVEBY  SECTIONAL: 

Franklin^  in  the  last  literary  labor  of  Ms  life,i  —  Jeffer- 
son, in  his  "  Notes  on  Virginia,"  —  Barlow,  in  his  heroic 
verse,  —  Eush,  in  a  work  which  inspired  the  pmise  of 
Clarkson,^  —  the  ingenious  author  of  the  "Algeririe  Cap- 
tive," the  earliest  American  novel,  and,  though  now  but 
little  known,  one  of  the  earliest  American  books  repub- 
lished in  London,  —  were  all  moved  by  the  contempla- 
tion of  Slavery.  "  If  our  fellow-citizens  in  the  Southern 
States  are  deaf  to  the  pleadings  of  Nature,"  exclaims 
the  last  earnestly,  "I  will  conjure  them,  for  the  sake 
of  consistency,  to  cease  to  deprive  their  feUow-creatures 
of  freedom,  which  their  writers,  their  orators,  represen- 
tatives, senators,  and  even  their  Constitutions  of  Gov- 
ernment, have  declared  to  be  the  unalienable  birth- 
right of  man."  ^  A  female  writer  and  poet,  earliest  in 
our  country  among  the  graceful  throng,  Sarah  Went- 
worth  Morton,  at  the  very  period  of  the  National  Conven- 
tion, admired  by  the  polite  society  in  which  she  lived, 
poured  forth  her  sympathies  also.  The  generous  labors 
of  John  Jay  in  behalf  of  the  crushed  African  inspired 
her  muse ;  and  in  another  poem,  commemorating  a  slave 
who  fell  while  vindicating  his  freedom,  she  rendered  a 
truthful  homage  to  his  inalienable  righte,  in  words  which 
I  now  quote  as  testimony  of  the  times :  — - 

'■  Does  not  the  To[oe  of  Rensoii  oiy, 

'  Claim  tJie  first  right  tliat  Nature  gava. 
From  the  red  aoonrge  of  boiiilage  fly, 
Nor  deign  to  live  a  burdened  slave  '  ?  "  * 

1  Spwch  of  Sid[  Meheraet  Ibrahim  in  the  Divsn  of  Algiers  Hgalnst  grnnt- 
iQg  the  Petition  of  the  Sect  called  Erilia,  or  Pnrista,  for  the  Abolition  of 
Piracy  and  Slavery  :  Works,  ed.  Sparks,  Vol.  II.  pp.  617-521. 

s  An  Address  to  the  Inhabitants  of  the  British  Settlements  on  the  Slavery 
of  the  Negroes.  Clflrkson'a  History  of  the  Abolition  of  the  African  Slave- 
Trada,  Vol.  I.  p.  152. 

«  Algerina  Captive,  Vol.  I.  p.  213. 

*  The  AlMoan  Chief :  My  Mind  and  its  Thoughts,  p.  201. 


■cibyGoogIc 


KEPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLiVE  ACT.  123 

Sucli,  Sir,  at  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  and 
the  first  organization  of  the  National  Government,  was 
the  outspoken,  unequivocal  heart  of  the  country.  Slav- 
ery was  abhorred.  Like  the  slave-trade,  it  was  regard- 
ed as  transitory;  and  by  many  it  was  supposed  that 
they  would  disappear  together.  As  the  oracles  grew 
mute  at  the  coming  of  Chiist,  and  a  voice  was  heard, 
crying  to  mariners  at  sea,  "  Great  Pan  is  dead ! "  so  at 
this  time  Slavery  became  dumb,  and  its  death  seemed 
to  be  near.  Voices  of  Freedom  fUled  the  air.  The  pa- 
triot, the  Christian,  the  scholar,  the  writer,  the  poet, 
vied  in  loyalty  to  this  cause.     All  were  Abolitionists. 

The  earliest  Congress  under  the  Coi^titution  attests 
this  mood.  One  of  its  first  acts  was  to  accept  the  Ordi- 
nance of  Freedom  for  the  Northwestern  Territory,  thus 
ratifyii^  the  prohibition  of  Slavery  in  all  enAstiTig  ter- 
ritory. It  is  impossible  to  exa^erate  the  importance 
of  this  act  as  a  national  landmark,  especially  when  we 
consider  that  on  the  list  of  those  who  sanctioned  it 
were  men  fresh  from  the  National  Convention,  and 
therefore  familiar  with  the  Constitution  which  it  framed. 
The  same  Congress  entertained  the  question  of  Slavery 
in  other  forms,"  —  sometimes  on  memorials  duly  pre- 
sented, and  then  ^ain  in  debata  Virginia  was  heard 
by  her  Abolition  Society  denouncing  Slavery  as  "not 
only  an  odious  degradation,  but  an  outr^eous  violation 
of  one  of  the  most  essential  r^hts  of  human  nature,  and 
utterly  repugnant  to  the  precepts  of  the  Gospel"  ^  There 
was  another  petitioner,  whose  illustrious  sei^vices  at  home 
and  abroad  entitled  him  to  speak  with  authority  rather 
tlian  with  prayer.  It  was  none  other  than  Benjamin 
Franklin.     After  a  long  life  of  various  effort,— repre- 

3  WelJ,  Power  of  CongresB  Over  the  District  of  Colnmbia,  p,  39. 


;db,Googlc 


124         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

senting  his  country  in  England  during  tlie  controversies 
that  preceded  tlie  Revolution,  —  returning  to  take  bis 
great  part  in  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  —  then 
representing  his  country  in  its  European  negotiations,  — 
then  again  returning  to  take  his  great  part  in  the  for- 
mation of  the  National  Constitution,  while  all  the  time 
his  life  was  elevated  by  philosophy  and  the  peculiar  re- 
nown he  had  won, — this  Apostle  of  Liberty,  recognized 
as  such  in  the  two  hemispheres,  whose  name  was  signed 
to  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  was  signed  to  the 
Treaty  of  AUianee  with  Trance,  was  s^ned  to  the 
Treaty  of  Independence  with  Great  Britain,  was  signed 
to  the  National  Constitution,  now  set  this  same  name 
to  another  instrument,  a  simple  petition  to  Congress. 
At  the  age  of  eighty-four,  venerable  with  years,  and  with 
all  the  honors  of  philosophy,  diplomacy,  and  statesman- 
ship,—  a  triple  crown  never  before  enjoyed,  —  the  pa- 
triot sage  comes  forward,  as  President  of  the  Abolition 
Society  of  Pennsylvania,  and  entreats  Congress  "that 
it  would  be  pleased  to  countenance  the  restoration  of 
Liberty  to  those  unhappy  men  who  alone  in  this  land 
of  Freedom  are  degraded  into  perpetual  bondage,"  —  and 
then  again,  in  concluding  words,  "  that  it  would  step  to 
the  very  verge  of  the  p(m&r  vested  in  it  for  discowaging 
every  species  of  traffic  in  the  persims  of  our  fellow-men."  ^ 
Shortly  after  this  prayer  the  petitioner  descended  to 
his  tomb,  from  which  he  still  prays  that  Congress  wUl 
step  to  the  veri/  verge  of  the  power  vested  in  it  to  riscoUE- 
AGE  Slavery;  and  this  prayer,  in  simple  words,  proclaims 
the  National  pohcy  of  the  Fathers.  Not  encouragement, 
but  discouragement  of  Slavery,  —  not  its  nationaliza- 
tion,  but  its  denationalization,  was  their  rule. 

J  Aniinls  of  Congress,  l5t  Cong.  2d  Sess.,  col.  1198. 


■cibyGoogIc 


HEFEAL  OE  THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  125 

Sir,  enough  has  been  said  to  show  the  sentiment 
which,  like  a  vital  air,  surrounded  the  National  Govern- 
ment as  it  stepped  into  being.  In  the  face  of  this  his- 
tory, and  in  the  absence  of  any  positive  sanction,  it  is 
absurd  to  suppose  that  Slavery,  which  under  the  Con- 
federation had  been  merely  sectional,  was  now  constitut- 
ed national  Our  fathers  did  not  say,  with  the  apostate 
angel, "  Evil,  be  thou  my  good ! "  In  different  spirit  they 
cried  out  to  Slavery,  "  Get  thee  behind  me,  Satan ! " 

There  is  yet  another  link.  In  the  discussions  which 
took  place  in  the  local  conventions  on  the  adoption  of 
the  Constitution,  a  sensitive  desire  was  manifested  to 
surround  all  persons  under  the  Constitution  with  addi- 
tional safeguards.  Fears  were  expressed,  from  the  sup- 
posed indeflniteness  of  some  of  the  powers  conceded  to 
the  National  Government,  and  also  from  the  absence  of  a 
Bill  of  Eights.  Massachusetts,  on  ratifying  the  Consti- 
tution, proposed  a  series  of  amendments,  at  the  head  of 
which  was  this,  characterized  by  Samuel  Adams,  in  the 
Convention,  as  "  A  Summary  of  a  Bill  of  Eights " :  — 

"  That  it  be  explicitly  declared,  that  all  powers  not  ex- 
pressly delegated  by  the  aforesaid  Constitution  are  reserved 
to  the  several  States,  to  be  by  them  exercised."  ^ 
New  Hampshhe,  New  York,  Eliode  Island,  Vh^nia, 
South  Carolina,  and  North  Carolina,  with  minorities  in 
Pennsylvania  and  Maryland,  united  in  this  proposi- 
tion. In  pursuance  of  these  recommendations,  the  First 
Congress  presented  for  adoption  the  following  article, 
which,  being  ratified  by  the  proper  number  of  States, 
became  part  of  the  Constitution  as  the  Tenth  Amend- 
ment :  — 

1  Debates,  etc.,  of  the  Maasachusetta  Convention,  Febraary  1  and  6, 
1T88.    Elliot's  Debates,  Vol.  IV.  p.  21L 


■cibyGoogIc 


126         FEEEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVERY   SECTIONAL: 

"  The  powers  not  delegated  to  tlie  United  States  by  the 
Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the  States,  are  resesrved 
to  the  States  respectively,  or  to  the  people." 

Stronger  words  could  not  be  employed  to  limit  the 
power  under  the  Constitution,  and  to  protect  the  people 
from  all  assumptions  of  the  National  Government,  'par- 
ticularly  in  derogation  of  Freedom.  Its  guardian-  char- 
acter commended  it  to  the  sagacious  mind  of  Jefferson, 
who  said:  "I  consider  the  foundation  of  the  Constitu- 
tion as  laid  on  this  ground."^  And  Samuel  Adams,  ever 
watchful  for  Freedom,  said :  "  It  removes  a  doubt  which 
many  have  raitertained  respectii^  this  matter,  and  gives 
assurance,  that,  if  any  law  made  hy  the  Federal  Govervr- 
ment  shall  be  extmded  beyond  the  poum-  granted  by  the 
•proposed  Constitution,  and  inconsistent  with  the  Consti- 
tution of  this  State,  it  will  be  an  error,  and  adjuc^ed 
by  the  courts  of  law  to  be  void."^ 

Beyond  all  question,  the  National  Government,  or- 
dained by  the  Constitution,  is  not  genera!  or  universal, 
but  specml  and  particular.  It  is  a  government  of  lim- 
ited powers.  It  has  no  power  which  is  not  del^ated. 
Especially  is  this  clear  with  regard  to  an  institution  like 
Slavery.  The  Constitution  contains  no  power  to  make 
a  king,  or  to  support  kingly  rule.  With  similar  reason 
it  may  be  said,  that  it  contains  no  power  to  make  a 
slave,  or  to  support  a  system  of  Slavery,  The  absence 
of  all  such  power  is  hardly  more  clear  in  the  one  case 

1  Opinion  agidnat  the  Oonstitutionality  of  a  Naaonal  Bank.  Fob.  IB,  lT91t 
Memoir,  Correspondance,  etc,  VoL  IV.  p.  633;  Writings,  Vol.  Vn.  p.  658. 
See  al90  Letter  to  Judge  Johnson,  June  13, 1823:  Memoir,  Correspondents, 
etc.,  Vol.  IV.  p.  374;  Worlis.  Voi.  VII.  p.  297. 

^  Debates,  etc.,  of  the  Maasaohusetts  Convention,  Fabi-iiarj'  1,  1789.  See 
also  Life  of  Samuel  Adams,  by  William  V.  Welis,  Vol.  IIL  pp.  371,  272. 
B2E,  331. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPF.AI.   OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  127 

than  in  the  other.  But  if  there  be  no  such  power,  all 
national  legislation  upholding  Slavery  must  be  uncon- 
stitutional and  void.  The  stream  cannot  be  higher 
than  the  fountain-head.  Nay,  more,  nothing  can  come 
out  of  nothing ;  the  stream  cannot  exist,  if  there  be  no 
spring  from  ■which  it  is  fed. 

At  the  risk  of  repetition,  but  for  the  sake  of  clear- 
ness, review  now  this  ailment,  and  gather  it  together. 
Considering  that  Slavery  is  of  such  an  offensive  char- 
acter that  it  can  find  sanction  only  in  "positive  law," 
and  that  it, has  no  such  "positive"  sanction  in  the  Con- 
stitution, —  that  the  Constitution,  according  to  ite  Pre- 
amble, was  ordained  to  "  establish  justice  "  and  "  secure 
the  blessii^  of  liberty,"  —  that,  in  the  Convention  which 
framed  it,  and  also  elsewhere  at  the  time,  it  was  de- 
clared not  to  sanction  Slavery,  —  that,  accordii^  to  the 
Declaration  of  Independence,  and  the  Address  of  the 
Continental  Congress,  the  Nation  was  dedicated  to 
"Liberty,"  and  the  "rights  of  human  nature,"  —  that, 
according  to  the  principles,  of  the  Common  Law,  the 
Constitution  must  be  interpreted  openly,  actively,  and 
perpetually  for  Freedom,  —  that,  according  to  the  decis- 
ion of  the  Supreme  Court,  it  acta  upon  slaves,  not  as 
property,  but  as  PERSONS,  —  that,  at  the  first  organization 
of  tlie  National  Government  under  Washington,  Slavery 
had  no  national  favor,  existed  nowhere  on  the  national 
territory,  beneath  the  national  flag,  but  was  openly  con- 
demned by  Nation,  Church,  Collies,  and  Literature  of 
the  time,  —  and,  finally,  that,  according  to  an  Amend- 
ment of  the  Constitution,  the  National  Government  can 
exercise  only  powers  delegated  to  it,  among  which  is 
none  to  support  Slavery,  —  considering  these  thii^s,  Sir, 


■cibyGoogIc 


128         FEEEDOM  NATIONAL,   SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

it  is  impossible  to  avoid  tlie  single  conclusion,  tliat  Slav- 
ery is  in  no  respect  a  national  institution,  and  that  the 
Constitution  Eowhere  upholds  property  in  man. 

There  is  one  other  special  provision  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, which  T  have  resei^ved  to  this  stage,  not  so  much 
from  its  superior  importance,  but  because  it  fitly  stands 
by  itself.  This  alone,  if  practically  applied,  would  carry 
Freedom  to  all  within  its  influence.  It  is  an  Amend- 
ment proposed  by  the  First  Congress,  as  follows ;  — 

"  No  person  shall  be  deprived  of  life,  liberty/,  or  property, 
without  due  process  of  Caw," 

Under  this  great  £egis  the  liberty  of  every  person  within 
the  national  jurisdiction  is  unequivocally  placed.  I  say 
every  person.  Of  tliis  there  can  be  no  c[uestion.  The 
w.ord  "person"  in  the  Constitution  embraces  every  hu- 
man heing  within  its  sphere,  whether  Caucasian,  Indian, 
or  African,  from  the  President  to  the  slave.  Show  me 
a  person  within  the  national  jurisdiction,  and  I  confi- 
dently claim  for  him  tliis  protection,  no  matter  what 
his  condition  or  race  or  color.  The  natural  meaning  of 
the  clause  is  clear,  but  a  single  fact  of  its  history  places 
it  in  the  broad  light  of  nooa.  As  originally  recom- 
mended by  Yii^inia,  North  Carolina,  and  Rhode  Island, 
it  was  restricted  to  the  /reemjin.  Its  language  was, 
"  Wo  freeman  ought  to  be  deprived  of  his  life,  liberty,  or 
property,  but  by  the  law  of  the  land."^  In  rejecting  this 
limitation,  the  authors  of  the  Amendment  revealed  their 
purpose,  that  no  person,  under  the  National  Govern- 
ment, of  whatever  character,  should  be  deprived  of  lib- 


■cibyGooglc 


EEPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVB  SIAVE  ACT.  129 

erty  withrmt  due  process  of  law, — that  is,  withoEt  due 
[iiesentuient,  indictment,  or  other  judicial  proceeding. 
Biit  this  Amendment  is  nothing  less  than  an  express 
guaranty  of  Personal  Liberty,  and  an  express  prohibi- 
tion of  its  invasion  anywhere,  at  least  within  the  na- 
tional jurisdiclson. 

Sir,  apply  these  principles,  and  Slavery  will  again  be 
as  when  Washington  took  his  first  oath  as  President. 
The  Union  Flag  of  the  Republic  will  become  once  more 
the  flag  of  Freedom,  and  at  all  points  within  the  national 
jurisdiction  will  refuse  to  cover  a  slave.  Beneath  its 
beneficent  folds,  wherever  it  is  carried,  on  land  or  sea. 
Slavery  wiR  disappear,  like  darkness  under  the  arrows 
of  the  ascending  sun,  — like  the  Spirit  of  Evil  before 
the  Angel  of  the  Lord. 

In  all  national  territories  Slavery  will  be  impossible. 

On  the  high  seas,  under  the  national  flag,  Slavery  will 
be  impossible. 

In  the  District  of  Columbia  Slavery  will  instantly 

Inspired  by  these  principles,  Congress  can  give  no 
sanction  to  Slavery  by  the  admission  of  new  Slave 
States. 

Kowhere  under  the  Constitution  can  the  Tfation,  by 
legislation  or  otherwise,  support  Slavery,  hunt  slaves,  or 
hold  property  in  man. 

Such,  Sir,  are  my  sincere  convictions.  According  to 
the  Constitution,  as  I  understand  it,  in  the  light  of 
the  Past  and  of  its  true  principles,  there  is  no  other 
conclusion  which  is  rational  or  tenable,  which  does 
not  defy  authoritative  rules  of  interpretation,  does  not 
falsify  indisputable  facts  of  liistoiy,  does   not  affi.'ont 


■cibyGoogIc 


130  FREEDOM    NATIONAL,    SLAVERY    gECTIOSjiL: 

the  public  opinion  in  whicli  it  bad  its  birth,  and  does 
not  dishonor  the  memory  of  the  i'atheis.  And  yet  pol- 
iticians of  the  hour  undertake  to  place  these  convictions 
under  formal  ban.  The  generous  sentiments  which 
filled  the  early  patriots,  and  impressed  upon  the  gov- 
ernment they  founded,  as  upon  the  coin  they  circulated, 
the  image  and  superscription  of  Liberty,  have  lost  their 
power.  The  slave-masters,  few  in  number,  amounting 
to  not  more  than  three  hundred  and  fifty  thousand,  ac- 
cording to  the  recent  census,  have  succeeded  in  dictat- 
ing the  policy  of  the  National  Government,  and  have 
written  Slavery  on  its  front.  The  change,  which  began 
in  the  desire  for  wealth,  was  aggravated  by  the  desire 
for  political  predominance.^  Through  Slavery  the  cot- 
ton crop  increased,  with  its  enriching  gains ;  through 
Slavery  States  became  part  of  the  Slave  Power.  And 
now  an  arrogant  and  unrelenting  ostracism  is  applied, 
not  only  to  all  who  express  themselves  i^inst  Slav- 
ery, but  to  every  man  unwilling  to  be  its  menial.  A 
novel  test  for  oflice  is  introduced,  which  would  have  ex- 
cluded all  tlie  Fathers  of  the  Eepublic,  —  even  Wash- 
ington, Jefferson,  and  Franklin  !  Yes,  Sir !  Startling  it 
may  be,  hut  indisputable.  Could  these  revei-ed  demi- 
gods of  history  once  again  descend  upon  earth  and 
mingle  in  our  affairs,  not  ono  of  them  could  receive  a 
nomination  from  the  National  Convention  of  either  of 
the  two  old  political  parties !  Out  of  the  convictions 
of  their  hearts  and  the  utterances  of  their  lips  against 
Slavery  they  would  be  condemned. 

This   single   fact  reveals   the  extent  to  which  the 

1  The  same  progression  in  ancient  Kome  arreslsd  tlie  observHtion  of  Snl- 
lust!  "  Primo  peoaniiB,  doin  imperii  cupido  crevit.  Ea  qiiBsi  matovies  om- 
ninm  malomni  ftiara."  —  QuWaa,  c.  10 


;db,Googlc 


EEPEAL   OF   THE   FUGITIVE    SLAVE   ACT,  131 

National  Government  has  departed  from  its  tme  course 
and  its  great  examples.  For  myself,  I  know  no  better 
aim  tinder  the  Constitution  than  to  hring  the  Govem- 
inent  back  to  the  precise  position  on  this  question  it 
occupied  on  the  auspicious  morning  of  its  first  organ- 
ization by  Washington,— 


that  the  sentiments  of  the  I'athera  may  again  prevail 
with  our  rulers,  and  the  National  Flag  may  nowhere 
shelter  Slavery. 

To  such  as  count  this  aspiration  unreasonable  let  me 
commend  a  renowned  and  life-giving  precedent  of  Eng- 
lish history.  As  early  as  the  days  of  Queen  Elizabeth, 
a  courtier  boasted  that  the  air  of  England  was  too  pure 
for  a  slave  to  breathe,^  and  the  Common  Law  was  said 
to  forbid  Slavery.  And  yet,  in  the  face  of  this  vaimt, 
kindred  to  that  of  our  fathers,  and  so  truly  honorable, 
slaves  were  introduced  from  the  West  Indies.  The  cus- 
tom of  Slavery  gradually  prevailed.  Its  positive  l^ality 
was  affirmed,  in  protessional  opinions,  by  two  eminent 
lawyers,  Talbot  and  Torke,  each  afterwards  Lord  Chan- 
cellor. It  was  also  afBrmed  on  the  bench  by  the  latter 
as  Lord  Hardwicke.*  England  was  already  a  Slave' 
State.  The  following  advertisement,  copied  from  a  Lon- 
don newspaper.  The  FuUie  Advertiser,  of  November  22, 
1769,  shows  that  the  journals  tliere  were  disfigured  as 
some  of  ours,  even  in  the  District  of  Columbia. 

"  To  be  sold,  a  black  girl,  the  property  of  J.  B.,  eleven 
years  of  age,  who  is  extremely  handy,  works  at  hor  needle 

•  Hot.,  Carm.  I.  xssiv.  3-5. 

s  Cnse  of  Sommorsett,  Howell's  State  Trials,  XX.  61. 

a  Ibid.,  81, 


■cibyGoogIc 


132  FBfiEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVEltY  SECTIONAL: 

tolerably,  and  speaks  English  perfectly  well ;  is  of  an  excel- 
lent temper  and  willing  disposition.  Inquire  of  her  owner 
at  the  Angel  Inn,  behind  St.  Clement's  Church,  in  the 
Strand." 

At  last,  in  1772,  only  three  years  after  this  advertise- 
ment, the  single  question  of  the  legality  of  Slavery  was 
presented  to  Lord  Mansfield,  on  a  writ  of  Habeas  Corpus. 
A  poor  negro,  named  Sommersett,  brought  to  England 
as  a  slave,  became  iO,  and,  with  an  inhumanity  disgrace- 
ful even  to  Slavery,  was  turned  adrift  upon  the  world. 
Through  the  charity  of  an  estimable  man,  the  eminent 
Abolitionist,  Granville  Sharp,  he  was  restored  to  health, 
when  his  unfeeling  and  avaricious  master  again  claimed 
him  aa  bondman.  The  claim  was  repelled.  After  elab- 
orate and  protracted  discussion  in  Westminster  HaE, 
marked  by  rarest  learning  and  ability.  Lord  Mansfield, 
with  discreditable  reluctance,  sullying  his  great  judicial 
name,  but  in  trembling  obedience  to  the  genius  of  the 
British  Constitution,  pronounced  a  decree  which  made 
the  early  boast  a  practical  verity,  and  rendered  Slavery 
forever  impossible  in  England.  More  than  fourteen  thou- 
sand persons,  at  that  time  held  aa  slaves,  and  breathing 
English  air, — four  times  as  many  as  are  now  found  in 
,  this  national  metropolis, —  stepped  forth  in  the  happi- 
ness and  dignity  of  freemen. 

With  this  guiding  example  I  cannot  despair.  The 
time  will  yet  come  when  the  boast  of  our  fathers  will 
be  made  a  practical  verity  also,  and  Court  or  Congress, 
in  the  spirit  of  this  British  judgment,  will  proudly  de- 
clare that  nowhere  imder  the  Constitution  can  man  hold 
property  in  man.  Tor  the  Republic  such  a  decree  will 
be  the  way  of  peace  and  safety.  As  Slavery  is  banished 
from  the  national  jurisdiction,  it  wiU  cease  to  vex 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL   OF   THE   FUGITIVE    SLAVE    ACT.  133 

oui  national  polities.  It  may  linger  in  the  Stat-es  as 
a  local  institution ;  but  it  will  no  longer  engender  na^ 
tional  animosities,  when  it  no  longer  demands  national 
support. 

II. 

Peom  this  general  review  of  the  relations  of  the 
National  Government  to  Slavery,  I  pass  to  tfefe  consid- 
eration of  THE  TRUE  NATURE  OF  THE  PEOVISION  FOE  THE 
RENDITION  OF  FUGITIVES  FROM  SERVICE,  embracing  an 
examination  of  this  provision  in  the  Constitution,  and 
especially  of  the  recent  Act  of  Congress  in  pursuance 
thereof.  As  I  hegin  this  discussion,  let  me  bespeak 
anew  your  candor.  Not  in  prejudice,  but  iu  the  light 
of  history  and  of  reason,  we  must  consider  this  sub- 
ject. The  way  will  then  be  easy,  and  the  conclusion 
certain. 

Much  error  arises  from  the  exaggerated  importance 
now  attached  to  tliis  provision,  and  from  assumptions 
with  regard  to  its  origin  and  primitive  character.  It  is 
often  asserted  that  it  was  su^ested  by  some  special 
difficulty,  which  had  become  practically  and  extensively 
felt,  anterior  to  the  Constitution.  But  tliia  is  one  of  the 
myths  or  fables  with  which  the  supporters  of  Slavery 
have  surrounded  their  false  god.  In  the  Articles  of  Con- 
federation, while  provision  is  made  for  the  surrender  of 
fugitive  criminals,  nothing  is  said  of  fugitive  slaves  or 
servants ;  and  there  is  no  evidence  in  any  quarter,  until 
after  the  National  Convention,  of  hardship  or  solicitude 
on  tbis  account.  No  previous  voice  was  heard  to  ex- 
press desire  for  any  provision  on  the  subject.  The 
story  to  the  contrary  is  a  modern  fiction. 

I  put  aside,  as  equally  fabulous,  the  common  saying, 


■cibyGoogIc 


134  FREEDOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVKUY   SECTIONAL; 

that  this  provision  was  one  of  the  original  compromisea 
of  the  Constitution,  and  an  essential  condition  of  Union. 
Thoi^h  sanctioned  by  eminent  judicial  opinions,  it  will 
be  found  that  this  statement  is  hastily  made,  without 
any  support  in  the  records  of  the  Convention,  the  only 
authentic  evidence  of  the  compromises ;  nor  will  it  be ' 
easy  to  find  any  authority  for  it  in  any  contemporary 
document,  speech,  published  letter,  or  pamphlet  of  any 
kind.  It  is  true  that  there  were  compromises  at  the 
formation  of  the  Constitution,  which  were  the  subject  of 
anxious  debate ;  but  this  was  not  one  of  them. 

There  was  a  compromise  between  the  small  and  lai^e 
States,  by  which  equality  was  secured  to  aU  the  States 
in  the  Senate. 

There  was  another  compromise  finally  carried,  under 
threats  from  the  South,  on  the  motion  of  a  New  England 
member,  by  which  the  Slave  States  are  allowed  Eepre- 
sentatives  according  to  the  whole  number  of  free  per- 
sons and  "  three  fifths  of  all  other  persons,"  ^  thus 
securing  pohtieal  power  on  account  of  their  slaves,  in 
consideration  that  direct  taxes  should  be  apportioned 
in  the  same  way.  Direct  taxes  have  been  imposed  at 
only  four  brief  intervals.  The  poKtical  power  has  been 
constant,  and  at  this  moment  sends  twenty-one  mem- 
bers to  the  other  Honsa 

There  was  a  third  compromise,  not  to  be  mentioned 
without  shame.  It  was  that  hateful  bai^ain  by  which 
Congress  was  restrained  until  1808  from  the  prohibition 
of  the  foreign  slave-trade,  thus  securing,  down  to  that 
period,  toleration  for  crime.  Tliis  was  pertinaciously 
pressed  by  the  South,  even  to  the  extent  of  absolute 
restriction  on  Congress.  John  Kutledge  said  :  "  If  the 
1  Madison's  Debates,  Jnlj  12, 1787. 


;db,Googlc 


EEPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SIAYE  ACT.  135 

Convention  thinks  that  Korth  Carolina,  South  Carolina, 
and  Geoi^ia  will  ever  agree  to  the  Plan  [the  National 
Constitution],  unless  their  right  to  import  slaves  be  un- 
touched, the  expectation  is  vain.  The  people  of  those 
States  will  never  be  such  fools  as  to  give  up  so  impor- 
tant an  interest"  Charles  Pinckney  said  :  "  South  Car- 
olina can  never  receive  the  Plan,  if  it  prohibits  the 
slave-trade."  Charles  Cotesworth  Pinckney  "thought 
himself  hound  to  declare  candidly,  that  he  did  not  think 
South  Carolina  would  stop  her  importations  of  slaves  in 
any  short  time."  ^  The  efirontery  of  the  slave-mast-ers 
was  matched  by  the  sordidness  of  the  Eastern  members, 
who  yielded  again.  Luther  Martin,  the  eminent  mem- 
ber of  the  Convention,  in  his  contemporary  address 
to  the  I^islature  of  Maryland,  described  the  compro- 
mise. "I  found,"  he  said,  "the  Eastern  States,  not- 
withstanding their  aversion  to  Slavery,  were  very  will- 
ing to  indulge  the  Southern  States  at  least  with  a  tem- 
porary liberty  to  prosecute  the  slave-trade,  provided  the 
Southern  States  vxnild  in  their  turn  gratify  them  ly  lay- 
ing no  restriction  on  navigation  acts!'  ^  The  bargain  was 
struck,  and  at  this  price  the  Southern  States  gained 
the  detestable  indulgence.  At  a  subsequent  day  Con- 
gress branded  the  slave-trade  as  piracy,  and  tlius,  by 
solemn  legislative  act,  adju(%ed  this  compromise  to  be 
felonious  and  wicked. 

Such  are  the  tliree  chief  oiiginal  compromises  of  the 
Constitution  and  essential  conditions  of  Union.  The 
case  of  fugitives  from  service  is  not  of  these.  During 
the  Convention  it  was  not  in  any  way  associated  with 

1  Mfldlson's  Deliates,  Anguat  21  snfl  22, 1TB7. 

5  The  Genuine  Informntion  delivered  to  the  Legislature  of  Maryland,  etc  , 
p.  36  !  Appended  to  Vol.  IV,  Elliofa  Debates. 


■cibyGoogIc 


136         niEEDOM  NATIONAL,   SLATEET  SECTIONAL: 

thesa  Nor  is  there  any  evidence  from  the  records  of 
this  body,  that  the  provision  on  this  subject  was  re- 
garded with  any  peculiar  interest.  As  its  absence  from 
the  Articles  of  Confederation  had  not  heen  the  occasion 
of  solicitude  or  desire,  anterior  to  the  National  Conven- 
tion, so  it  did  not  enter  into  any  of  the  original  plans  of 
the  Constitution.  It  was  introduced  tardily,  at  a  late 
perio"a  of  the  Convention,  and  adopted  with  very  little 
and  most  casuEd  discussion.  A  few  facts  show  how 
utterly  unfoxinded  are  recent  assumptions. 

The  National  Convention  was  convoked  to  meet  at 
PhQadelphia  on  the  second  Monday  in  May,  1787, 
Several  members  appeared  at  this  time,  but,  a  majority 
of  the  States  not  being  represented,  those  present  ad- 
journed from  day  to  day  until  the  25th,  when  the  Con- 
vention was  oi^nized  by  the  choice  of  George  Wash- 
ington as  President.  On  the  28th  a  few  brief  rules 
and  orders  were  adopted.  On  the  next  day  they  com- 
menced their  great  work. 

On  the  same  day,  Edmund  Randolph,  of  slaveholding 
Viiginia,  laid  before  the  Convention  a  series  of  fifteen 
resolutions,  containing  his  plan  for  the  establishment  of 
a  New  National  Government.  Here  was  no  allusion  to 
fugitive  slaves. 

Also,  on  the  same  day,  Charles  Pinckney,  of  slave- 
holdii^  South  Carolina,  laid  before  the  Convention  what 
was  called  "A  Draft  of  a  Federal  Government,  to  be 
agreed  upon  between  the  Free  and  Independent  States 
of  America,"  an  elaborate  paper,  marked  by  considerable 
minuteness  of  detail.  Here  are  provisions,  borrowed 
from  the  Articles  of  Confederation,  securing  to  the  citi- 
zens of  each  State  equal  privileges  in  the  several  States, 
giving  faith  to  the  public  records  of  the   States,  and 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL  07  THE  EUGiriVE  SLAVE   ACT.  137 

ordaining  the  surrender  of  fugitives  from  justice.  But 
this  draft,  though  from  the  flaming  guardian  of  the  slave 
interest,  contained  no  allusion  to  fugitive  slaves. 

In  the  course  of  the  Convention  other  plans  were 
brought  forward:  on  the  15th  June,  a  series  of  eleven 
propositions  by  Mr.  Patterson,  of  New  Jersey,  "  so  as  to 
render  the  Federal  Constitution  adequate  to  the  exigen- 
cies of  Government  and  the  preservation  of  the  Union  " ; 
on  the  18th  June,  eleven  propositions  by  Mr.  Hamilton, 
of  New  York,  "  containing  his  ideas  of  a  suitable  plan 
of  Government  for  the  United  States  " ;  and  on  the  19th 
June,  Mr.  Randolph's  resolutions,  originally  offered  on 
the  29th  May,  "as  altered,  amended,  and  agreed  to  in 
Committee  of  the  Whole  House."  On  the  26th  July, 
twenty-three  resolutions,  already  adopted  on  diiferent 
days  in  the  Convention,  were  referred  to  a  "  Committee 
of  Detail,"  for  reduction  to  the  form  of  a  Constitution. 
On  the  6th  August  this  Committee  reported  the  fin- 
ished draft  of  a  Constitution.  And  yet  in  all  these 
resolutions,  plans,  and  drafts,  seem  in  number,  proceed- 
ing from  eminent  members  and  from  able  committees, 
no  allusion  is  made  to  fugitive  slaves.  For  three  months 
the  Convention  was  in  session,  and  not  a  word  uttered 
on  this  subject. 

At  last,  on  the  28th  August,  as  the  Convention  was 
drawing  to  a  close,  on  the  consideration  of  the  article 
providing  for  the  privileges  of  citizens  in  different  States, 
we  meet  the  first  reference  to  this  matter,  in  words  wor- 
thy of  note.  "  General  [Charles  Cotesworth]  Pinctney 
was  not  satisfied  with  it.  He  seemed  to  icish  some  pro- 
visimi  should  he  included  in  favor  of  property  in  slaves." 
But  he  Tttade  no  proposition.  Unwilling  to  shock  the  Con- 
vention, and  uncertain  in  his  own  mind,  he  only  seemed 


■cibyGoogIc 


138  TEEEDOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVERY    SECTIONAL: 

to  wish  such  a  provision.  In  this  vague  expression  of 
a  vague  desire  tliis  idea  first  appeared.  In  this  modest, 
hesitating  phrase  is  the  germ  of  the  audacious,  unhesi- 
tating Slave  Act.  Here  is  the  little  vapor,  -which  has 
since  swollen,  as  in  the  Arabian  tale,  to  the  power  and 
dimensions  of  a  giant.  The  next  article  under  discus- 
sion provided  for  the  surrender  of  fugitives  from  jus- 
tice, Mr.  Butler  and  Mr.  Charles  Piiickney,  both  from 
South  Carolina,  now  moved  openly  to  recLuire  "  fugitive 
slaves  and  servants  to  he  dehvered  up  like  criminals." 
Here  was  no  disguise.  With  Hamlet,  it  was  now  said 
in  spirit,  — 

"Seemi,  Madnm  1    Nny,  it  is.    I  know  not  seems." 

But  the  very  boldness  of  the  effort  drew  attention  and 
opposition.  Mr.  Wilson,  of  Pennsylvania,  the  learned 
jurist  and  excellent  man,  at  once  objected :  "  This  would 
oblige  the  Executive  of  the  State  to  do  it  at  the  public 
expense."  Mr.  Sherman,  of  Connecticut,  "  saw  no  more 
propriety  in  the  public  seizing  and  surrendering  a  slave 
or  servant  than  a  horse."  Under  the  pressure  of  these 
objections,  the  offmsive  j)ro;poBition  was  withdrawn; — 
never  more  to  he  renewed.  The  article  for  the  surren- 
der of  criminals  was  then  unanimously  adopted.^  On 
the  next  day,  29th  August,  profiting  by  the  suggestions 
already  made,  Mr.  Butler  moved  a  proposition,  —  sub- 
stantially like  that  now  found  in  the  Constitution, — 
for  the  surrender,  not  of  "  fugitive  slaves,"  as  originally 
proposed,  but  simply  of  "persons  bound  to  service  or 
labor,"  which,  without  debate  or  opposition  of  any 
kind,  was  unanimously  adopted.^ 

Here,  palpably,  was  no  labor  of  compromise,  no  ad- 


■cibyGooglc 


EEPEAL   OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  139 

jnstment  of  conflicting  interests,  —  nor  even  any  ex- 
pression of  solicitude.  The  clause  finally  adopted  was 
vague  and  faint  as  the  original  su^estion.  In  ita  nat- 
ural import  it  is  not  applicable  to  slaves.  If  supposed 
by  some  to  be  applicable,  it  is  clear  that  it  was  sup- 
posed by  others  to  be  inapplicable.  It  is  now  insisted 
that  the  term  "persons  hound  to  service,"  or  "  held  to  ser- 
mce,"  as  expressed  in  the  final  revision,  is  the  equivalent 
or  synonym  for  "slaves."  This  interpretation  is  rebuked 
by  an  incident  to  which  reference  has  been  already 
made,  but  which  will  bear  repetition.  On  the  13th 
September  —  a  little  more  than  a  fortnight  after  the 
clause  was  adopted,  and  when,  if  deemed  to  be  of 
any  significance,  it  could  not  have  been  forgotten —  the 
very  word  "service"  came  under  debate,  and  received 
a  fixed  meaning.  It  was  unanimously  adopted  as  a 
substitute  for  "servitude"  in  another  part  of  the  Con- 
stitution, for  the  reason  that  it  expressed  "the  obligations 
of  free  persons"  while  the  other  expressed  "the  condi- 
tion of  slaves."  In  the  face  of  this  authentic  evidence, 
reported  by  Mr.  Madison,  it  is  difficult  to  see  how  the 
term  "persons  held  to  service"  can  be  deemed  to  ex- 
press anything  beyond  "  the  obligations  oifree  persons." 
Thus,  in  the  light  of  calm  incniiry,  does  this  ex^gerated 
clause  lose  its  importance. 

The  provision,  showing  itself  thus  tardily,  and  so 
slightly  regarded  in  the  Kational  Convention,  was  neg- 
lected in  much  of  the  contemporaneous  discussion  be- 
fore the  people.  In  the  Conventions  of  South  Carolina, 
North  Carolina,  and  Virginia,  it  was  commended  as  se- 
curing important  rights,  though  on  this  point  there  was 
difference  of  opinion.  In  the  Vii^inia  Convention,  an 
eminent  character,  Mr.  George  Mason,  with  others,  ex- 


■cibyGoogIc 


140         FEEEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

pressly  declared  that  there  ■was  "  no  security  of  property 
coming  within  thia  section."  In  tlie  other  Conventions 
it  was  disregarded.  Massachusetts,  while  exhibiting 
peculiar  sensitiveness  at  any  responsibility  for  Slaveiy, 
seemed  to  view  it  with  unconcern.  One  of  her  leading 
statesmen,  General  Heath,  in  the  debates  of  the  State 
Convention,  strenuously  asserted,  that,  in  ratifying  the 
Constitution,  the  people  of  Massachusetts  "would  do 
nothing  to  hold  the  blacks  in  slavery,"  "  The  Federal- 
ist,"^ in  its  classification  of  the  powers  of  Coi^'ess, 
describes  and  groups  a  laige  number  as  "  those  which 
provide  for  the  harmony  and  proper  intercourse  among 
the  States,"  and  therein  spealis  of  the  power  over  public 
records,  standing  next  in  the  Constitution  to  the  pro- 
vision concerning  fugitives  from  service ;  but  it  fails 
to  recognize  the  latter  among  the  means  of  promoting 
"  harlnony  and  proper  intercourse  " ;  nor  does  its  trium- 
virate of  authors  anywhere  allude  to  the  provision. 

The  indifference  thus  far  attending  this  subject  still 
continued.  The  earUest  Act  of  Congress,  passed  in  1793, 
drew  little  attention.  It  was  not  suggested  originally 
by  any  difficulty  or  anxiety  touching  fugitives  from  ser- 
vice, nor  is  there  any  contemporary  record,  in  debate  or 
otherwise,  showing  that  any  special  importance  was  at- 
tached to  its  provisions  in  this  regard.  The  attention 
of  Congress  was  directed  to  fugitives  from  justice,  and, 
with  little  deliberation,  it  undertook,  in  the  same  biU, 
to  provide  for  both  cases.  In  this  accidental  manner 
was  legislation  on  this  subject  first  attempted. 

There  is  no  evidence  that  fugitives  were  often  seized 
ander  this  Act.  From  a  competent  inquirer  we  learn 
that  twenty-six  years  elapsed  before  it  was  s 

1  No.  42. 


■cibyGoogIc 


IffiPEAL  OF  THE  FUGmVE  SLAVE  ACT.  141 

enforced  in  any  Free  State,  It  is  certain,  that,  i^i  a  case 
at  Boston,  towards  the  close  of  the  last  century,  iUns- 
trated  by  Josiali  Quiiicy  m  counsel,  the  crowd  about 
the  magistrate,  at  the  examination,  c[uietly  and  sponta^ 
neously  opened  a  way  for  the  fi^itive,  and  thus  the  Act 
failed  to  be  executed.  It  is  also  certain,  that,  in  Ver- 
mont, at  the  begiiming  of  the  century,  a  Judge  of  the 
Supreme  Coiirt  of  the  State,  on  application  for  the  sur- 
render of  an  alleged  slave,  accompanied  by  documentary 
evidence,  gloriously  refused  compliance,  wra/ess  ike  mas- 
ter could  show  a  Bill  of  Sale  from  the  Almighty.  Even 
these  cases  passed  without  public  comment 

In  1801  the  subject  was  introduced  in  the  House  of 
Eepresentatives  by  an  effort  for  another  Act,  which, 
on  consideration,  was  rejected.  At  a  later  day,  in 
1817-18,  though  still  disr^rded  by  the  country,  it 
seemed  to  excite  a  short-lived  interest  in  Congress.  In 
the  House  of  Eepresentatives,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Pindall, 
of  Virginia,  a  committee  was  appointed  to  inquire  into 
the  expediency  of  "providing  more  effectually  by  law 
for  reclaiming  servants  and  slaves  escaping  from  one 
State  into  another,"  and  a  bill  reported  by  them  to 
amend  the  Act  of  1793,  after  consideration  for  several 
days  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  was  passed.  In  the 
Senate,  after  much  attention  and  warm  debate,  it  passed 
with  amendments.  But  on  return  to  the  House  for 
adoption  of  the  amendments,  it  was  dropped.^  This  ef- 
fort, which,  in  the  discussions  of  this  subject,  has  been 
thus  far  unnoticed,  is  chiefly  remarkable  as  the  earUest 
recorded  evidence  of  the  unwarrantable  assertion,  now 
so  common,  that  this  provision  was  originally  of  vital 
importance  to  the  peace  and  harmony  of  the  country. 
1  Annala  of  Congraaa,  Hoosii  and  Senate  Journals,  IStii  Cong.  1st  Sess, 


;db,Googlc 


142         TEEEDOM  NATIONAL,  BLA.VEEY  SBCTIOKAL: 

Afc  last,  in  1850,  we  have  another  Act,  passed  by  both 
Houses  of  Congress,  and  approved  by  the  President, 
familiarly  known  as  the  Fugitive  Slave  BiU.  As  I  read 
this  statute,  I  am  filled  with  painful  emotious.  The 
masterly  subtlety  with  which  it  is- drawn  m^ht  chal- 
lenge admiration,  if  exerted  for  a  benevolent  purpose ; 
but  in  an  ^e  of  sensibility  and  refinement,  a  maehine 
of  torture,  however  skilful  and  apt,  cannot  be  regarded 
without  hoiTor.  Sir,  in  the  name  of  the  Constitution, 
which  it  violates,  of  my  country,  which  it  dishonors, 
of  Humanity,  which  it  degrades,  of  Christianity,  which 
it  offends,  I  arraign  this  enactment,  and  now  hold  it  up 
to  the  judgment  of  the  Senate  and  the  world.  Again, 
I  shrink  from  no  responsibility.  I  may  seem  to  stand 
alone ;  but  all  the  patriots  and  martyrs  of  history,  all 
the  Fathers  of  the  EepubUc,  are  with  me.  Sir,  there  is 
no  attribute  of  God  which  does  not  take  part  gainst 
this  Act. 

But  I  am  to  r^ard  it  now  chieily  as  an  inftingement 
of  the  Constitution,  Here  its  outrages,  fl^rant  as  man- 
ifold, assume  the  deepest  dye  and  broadest  character 
only  when  we  consider  that  by  its  language  it  is  not 
restricted  to  any  special  race  or  class,  to  the  African  or 
to  the  person  with  African  blood,  but  that  any  inhab- 
itant of  the  United  States,  of  whatever  complexion  or 
condition,  may  be  its  victim.  Without  discrimination 
of  color  even,  and  in  violation  of  every  presumption  of 
freedom,  the  Act  surrenders  aU  who  may  be  claimed  as 
"owing  service  or  labor"  to  the  same  tyrannical  pro- 
ceeding.. If  there  be  any  whose  sympathies  ai'e  not 
moved  for  the  slave,  who  do  not  cherish  the  rights  of 
the  humble  African,  struggling  for  divine  Freedom,  as 
warmly  as  the  rights  of  the  white  man,  let  him  con- 


■cibyGooglc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT,  143 

sicler  well  that  the  rights  of  all  are  equally  assailed. 
"  Nephew,"  said  Algernon  Sidney  in  prison,  on  the 
night  hefore  his  execution,  "  I  value  not  my  own  life  a 
chip ;  but  what  concerns  me  is,  that  the  law  which  takes 
away  my  life  may  hang  every  ono  of  you,  whenever  it 
is  thought  convenient." 

Whilst  thus  comprehensive  in  its  provisions,  and 
applicable  to  all,  there  is  no  safeguard  of  Human  Free- 
dom which  the  monster  Act  does  not  set  at  nought 

It  commits  this  great  question  —  than  which  none  is 
more  sacred  in  the  law  —  not  to  a  solemn  trial,  but  to 
summary  proceedings. 

It  commits  this  great  question,  not  to  one  of  the  high 
tribunals  of  the  land,  but  to  the  unaided  judgment  of  a 
single  petty  magistrate. 

It  commits  this  great  question  to  a  magistrate  ap- 
pointed, not  by  the  President  with  the  consent  of  the 
Senate,  but  by  the  Court,  —  holding  office,  not  during 
good  behavior,  but  merely  dvu'ing  the  will  of  the  Court, 
—  and  receiving,  not  a  regular  salary,  but  fees  according 
to  each  individual  case. 

It  authorizes  judgment  on  ex  parte  evidence,  by  affi- 
davit, without  the  sanction  of  cross-examination. 

It  denies  the  writ  of  Habeas  Corpus,  ever  known  as 
the  PaUadinm  of  the  citizen. 

Contrary  to  the  declared  purposes  of  the  framers  of 
the  Constitution, it  sends  the  fugitive  back  "at  the  pub- 
lic expense." 

Adding  meanness  to  violation  of  the  Constitution,  it 
bribes  the  Commissioner  by  a  double  stipend  to  pro- 
nounce against  Freedom.  If  be  dooms  a  man  to  Slav- 
ery, the  reward  is  ten  dollars ;  but  saving  him  to 
Freedom,  his  dole  is  five. 


■cibyGoogIc 


144       theedom:  national,  slavery  sectional; 

The  Consfcitution  expressly  secures  tlie  "  free  exercise 
of  rel^ioo  " :  but  this  Act  visits  with  unrelenting  pen- 
alties the  faithful  men  and  women  who  render  to  the 
fugitive  that  countenance,  succor,  and  shelter  which  in 
their  conscience  "  religion  "  requires ;  and  tlius  is  prac- 
tical religion  directly  assailed.  Plain  commandments 
are  broken ;  and  are  we  not  told  that "  whosoever  shall 
break  one  of  these  least  commandments,  and  shall 
teach  men  so,  he  shall  be  called  the  least  in  the  king- 
dom of  Heaven"?^ 

As  it  is  for  the  public  weal  that  there  should  be 
an  end  of  suits,  so  by  the  consent  of  civilized  nations 
these  must  be  instituted  within  lixed  limitations  of 
time ;  but  this  Act,  exalting  Slavery  above  even  this 
practical  principle  of  universal  justice,  ordains  proceed- 
ings against  Freedom  without  any  reference  to  the  lapse 
of  tima 

Glancing  only  at  these  points,  and  not  stopping  for 
aigument,  vindication,  or  illustration,  I  come  at  once 
upon  two  chief  radical  objections  to  this  Act,  identical 
in  principle  with  those  triumphantly  urged  by  our 
fathers  against  the  British  Stamp  Act :  first,  that  it  is 
a  usurpation  by  Congress  of  powers  not  granted  by 
the  Constitution,  and  an  infraction  of  rights  secured  to 
the  States ;  and,  secondly,  that  it  takes  away  Trial  by- 
Jury  in  a  c[uestion  of  Personal  Liberty  and  a  suit  at 
Common  Law.  Either  of  these  objections,  if  sustained, 
strikes  at  the  very  root  of  the  Act.  That  it  is  obnox- 
ious to  both  is  beyond  doubt. 

Here,  at  this  stage,  I  encounter  the  difficulty,  that 
these  objections  are  already  foreclosed  by  legislation  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  145 

Congress  and  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court,  —  that  as 
early  as  1793  Congress  assumed  power  over  this  sub- 
ject  hy  an  Act  which  failed  to  secure  Trial  by  Jury, 
and  that  the  validity  of  this  Act  under  the  Consti- 
tution has  been  afflrmed  by  the  Supreme  Court.  On 
examination,  this  difficulty  -will  disappear. 

Tlie  Act  of  1793  proceeded  from  a  Congress  that  had 
already  recognized  the  United  States  Bank,  chartered 
by  a  previous  Congress,  which,  though  sanctioned  by 
the  Supreme  Court,  has  been  since  in  liigh  quarters  pi-o- 
nouuced  unconstitutional  If  it  eiTed  as  to  the  Bank, 
it  may  liave  erred  also  as  to  fugitives  from  service. 
But  the  Act  itself  contains  a  capital  error  on  this  very 
subject,  30  declared  by  the  Supreme  Court,  in  pretend- 
ing to  vest  a  portion  of  tlie  judicial  power  of  the  Nation 
in  State  officers.  This  error  takes  from  the  Act  all 
authority  as  an  interpretation  of  the  Constitution.  I 
dismiss  it. 

The  decisions  of  the  Supreme  Court  are  entitled  to 
great  consideration,  and  will  not  be  mentioned  by  me 
except  with  respect.  Among  the  memories  of  my  youth 
are  happy  days  when  I  sat  at  the  feet  of  tliis  tribunal, 
while  Marshall  presided,  with  Story  by  his  aide.  The 
pi-essure  now  proceeds  from  the  ease  of  Prigg  v.  Pemir- 
sylvania  (16  Petera,  539),  where  is  asserted  the  power 
of  Congress.  Without  going  into  minute  criticism  of 
this  judgment,  or  considerii^  the  extent  to  which  it  is 
extra-judicial,  and  therefore  of  no  binding  force,  ^  all 
which  has  been  done  at  the  bar  in  one  State,  and  by  an 
able  court  in  another,  —  but  conceding  to  it  a  certain 
degree  of  weight  as  a  rule  to  the  judiciary  on  this  par- 
ticular point,  stiU.  it  does  not  touch  the  grave  question 
which  springs  from  the  denial  of  Trial  by  Jury.     This 


■cibyGoogIc 


146  FEEEBOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVERY    SECnONAL: 

judgment  was  pronounced  by  Mr.  Justice  Story.  From 
the  interesting  biography  of  the  great  jurist,  recently 
published  by  his  son,  we  learn  that  the  question  of  Trial 
by  Jury  was  not  considered  as  before  the  Court ;  so  that, 
in  the  estimation  of  the  learned  judge  himself,  it  wa-s 
still  an  open  question.     Here  are  the  words. 

"One  prevailing  opinion,  which  has  created  great  preju- 
dice against  this  jadgmeot,  is,  that  it  denies  the  right  of  a 
person  claimed  as  a  fugitive  from  serviee  or  labor  to  a  trial 
by  jury.  This  mistake  aris^  from  supposing  the  case  to  in- 
volve the  general  question  as  to  the  constitutionality  of  the 
Act  of  1 793.  But  in  fact  no  such  question  was  in  the  case ; 
and  the  argument,  that  the  Act  of  1 793  wns  unconstitutional, 
becai^e  it  did  not  provide  for  a  trial  by  jury  according  to 
the  requisitions  of  the  sixth  article  in  the  Amendments  to 
the  Constitution,  having  been  suggested  to  my  father  on  his 
retiUTi  from  Washington,  he  replied,  that  this  question  was 
not  argued  by  counsel  nor  considered  by  the  Court,  and  that 
he  should  still  consider  it  an  open  one."^ 

But  whatever  may  be  the  influence  of  this  judgment 
as  a  rule  to  the  judiciary,  it  cannot  arrest  our  duty  as 
legislators.  And  here  I  adopt  with  entire  assent  the 
langu^e  of  President  Jackson,  in  his  memorable  Veto, 
in  1832,  of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States.  To  his 
course  was  opposed  the  authority  of  the  Supreme  Court, 
and  this  is  his  reply. 

"  If  the  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  cover  the  whole 
ground  of  this  Act,  it  ought  not  to  control  the  coordinate 
authorities  of  this  Government.  The  Congress,  the  Execii- 
tive,  and  the  Court  must  each  for  itself  be  guided  by  its  own 
opinion  of  the  Constitutioa  £lach  public  officer  who  taies  an 
oath  to  support  tlix  Constitviion  eweors  that  he  ttiill  support  it 

>  Life  and  Letters  of  Joseph  Story,  edited  by  his  Son,  Vol,  II  p  3e%. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL    OF   THE    FUGITIVE    SLAYE   ACT,  147 

as  he  wtderstands  it,  and  not  as  it  is  understood  hi;  others.  It 
is  as  muuh  the  duty  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  of  the 
Senate,  and  of  the  President,  to  decide  upon  the  constitu- 
tionality of  any  bill  or  resolution  which  may 
to  them  for  passage  or  approval,  as  it  is  of  the  S 
Judges,  when  it  may  be  brought  before  them  for  Judicial 

decision The  authority  of  the  Supreme  Court  must  not, 

therefore,  be  permitted  to  control  the  Congress  or  the  Exec- 
utive,  when  acting  in  their  legislative  capacities,  but  to  have 
only  such  influence  as  tho  foi-ce  of  their  reasoning  may  de- 
sorve."^ 

With  these  authoritative  words  I  dismiss  tliis  topic. 
The  early  legislation  of  Congress  and  the  decisions  of 
the  Supreme  Court  cannot  stand  in  our  way.  1  advance 
to  the  argument. 

( 1.)  First,  of  the  power  of  Congress  over  tlm  subject. 

The  Constitution  contains  fovjers  granted  to  Congress, 
compacts  between  the  States,  and  •prohihitions  addressed 
to  the  Nation  and  to  the  States.  A  compact  or  prohi- 
bition may  be  accompanied  by  a  power,  —  but  not  ne- 
cessarily, for  it  is  essentially  distinct  in  nature.  And 
here  the  single  question  arises,  Whether  the  Constitu- 
tion, by  grant,  general  or  special,  confers  upon  Congress 
any  pixwer  to  legislate  on  the  subject  of  fugitives  from 
servica 

The  whole  l^slative  power  of  Congress  is  derived 
from  two  distinct  sources :  first,  from  the  general  grant, 
attached  to  the  long  catalogue  of  powers,  "  to  make  all 
laws  which  shall  be  necessary  and  proper  for  carry- 
hig  into  execution  the  foregoing  powers,  and  all  other 
powers  vested  by  this  Constitution  in  the  Government 
»  Senate  Joanm],  aad  Cong.  Ist  Seas.,  pp.  438,  J39. 


■cibyGoogIc 


148         FEEEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

of  the  Umted  States,  or  in  any  department  or  officer 
thereof " ;  and,  secondly,  from  special  grants  in  other 
parts  of  the  Constitution,  As  the  provision  in  question 
does  not  appear  in  the  catalogue  of  powers,  and  does  not 
purport  to  vest  any  power  in  the  Government  of  the 
United  States,  or  in  any  department  or  officer  thereof, 
no  power  to  l^jislate  on  this  suhjeet  can  be  derived 
from  the  general  grant.  Nor  can  any  such  power  be 
derived  from  any  special  grant  in  any  other  part  of  the 
Constitution ;  for  none  such  exists.  The  conclusion 
must  be,  that  no  power  is  delegated  to  Congress  over 
the  surrender  of  fugitives  from  service. 

In  all  contemporary  discussions  and  comments,  the 
Constitution  was  constantly  justified  and  recommended 
on  the  ground  tlmt  the  powers  not  given  to  the  Govern- 
ment were  withheld.  If  under  ita  original  provisions 
any  doubt  on  this  head  could  have  existed,  it  was  re- 
moved, so  far  as  language  could  remove  it,  by  the  Tenth 
Amendment,  which,  as  we  have  ah'eady  seen,  expressly 
declares,  that  "the  powers  not  delegated  to  the  United 
States  by  the  Constitution,  nor  prohibited  by  it  to  the 
States,  are  reserved  to  the  States  respectively,  or  to  the 
people."  Here,  on  the  simple  text  of  the  Constitution,  I 
might  leave  this  question.  But  its  importance  justifies 
more  extended  examination,  in  twofold  light :  f,rst,  in 
the  history  of  the  Convention,  revealing  the  unmis- 
takable intention  of  ifcs  members ;  and,  secondly ,  in  the 
true  principles  of  our  Political  System,  by  which  the 
powers  of  tlie  Nation  and  of  the  States  are  respectively 
guarded. 

Look  first  at  the  history  of  the  Convention.  The  arti- 
cles of  the  old  Confederation,  adopted  by  the  Continen- 
tal Congress  15th  November,  1777,  though  containing 


■cibyGoogIc 


CEFEAL   OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  149 

ao  reference  to  fugitives  from  service,  had  provisions 
substantially  like  those  in  out  present  Constitution, 
touching  the  privileges  of  citizens  in  the  several  States, 
the  surrender  of  fugitives  from  justice,  and  the  credit 
due  to  the  public  records  of  States,  But,  since  the 
Confederation  had  no  powers  not  "  expressly  delegated," 
and  as  no  power  was  delegated  to  legislate  on  these  mat- 
ters, they  were  nothing  more  than  articles  of  treaty  or, 
compact.  Afterwards,  at  the  National  Convention,  these 
three  provisions  found  place  in  the  first  reported  draft 
of  a  Constitution,  and  were  ari'anged  in  the  very  order 
which  they  occupied  in  the  Articles  of  Confederation. 
The  clause  relating  to  public  records  stood  last.  Mark 
this  fact. 

When  this  clause,  heing  in  form  merely  a  compact, 
came  up  for  consideration  in  the  Convention,  various 
effo  ts  we  e  made  to  graft  upon  it  a  power.  This  was 
on  th  J  day  of  the  adoption  of  the  clause  relating 
t  f  t  s  from  service.  Charles  Rnclmey  moved  to 
c  mmit  t  with  a  proposition  for  a  power  to  establish 
n  f  n  I  ws  on  the  subject  of  banlGniptcy  and  foreign 
hills  of  exchange  Mr.  Madison  was  in  favor  of  a  power 
for  the  execution  of  judgments  in  other  States.  Gouver- 
neur  Morris,  on  the  same  day,  moved  to  commit  a  fur- 
ther pioposition  for  s,poioer  "  to  determine  the  proof  and 
effect  of  such  acts,  records,  and  proceedings."  Amidst 
all  these  efforts  to  associate  a  power  with  this  compact, 
it  IS  clear  that  nobody  supposed  that  any  such  already 
existed  This  narrative  places  the  views  of  the  Conven- 
tion beyond  question. 

The  compact  regarding  public  records,  together  with 
these  vuious  propositions,  was  referred  to  a  commit- 
tee, on  which  were  Mr.  Randolph  and  Mr.  Wilson,  v^ith 


■cibyGoogIc 


150         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,   SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

John  Eutledge,  of  South  Carolina,  as  chairman.  After 
several  days,  they  reported  the  compact,  with  a  power 
in  Congress  to  prescribe  by  general  laws  the  manner 
in  which  stieh  records  shall  be  proved.  A  discussion 
ensued,  in  which  Mr,  Eandolph  complained  that  the 
"definition  of  the  powers  of  tlie  Government  was  so 
loose  as  to  give  it  opportunities  of  usurping  all  the 
State  powers.  Me  was  for  not  going  further  than  the 
Beport,  which  enables  the  Legislature  to  provide  for  the 
effect  of  judgments."  ^  The  clause  of  compact  with  the 
power  attached  was  then  adopted,  and  is,  now  part  of 
the  Constitution.  In  presence  of  this  solicitude  for  the 
presei-vation  of  "  State  powers,"  even  while  considering 
a  proposition  for  an  express  power,  and  also  of  the  dis- 
tinct statement  of  Mr.  Eandolph,  that  he  "  was  for  not 
going  further  than  the  Report,"  it  is  evident  that  the 
idea  could  not  then  have  occurred,  that  a  power  was 
coupled  with  the  naked  clause  of  compact  on  fugitives 
from  sei-vice. 

At  a  later  day  the  various  clauses  and  articles  sev- 
erally adopted  from  time  to  time  in  Convention  were 
referred  to  a  committee  of  revision  and  arrangement, 
that  they  might  be  reduced  to  form  as  a  connectetl 
whole.  Kef}-e  another  change  was  made.  The  clause  re- 
lating to  public  records,  with  tlie  power  attached,  was 
taken  from  its  original  place  at  the  bottom  of  the  clauses 
of  compact,  and  promoted  to  stand  first  in  the  article, 
as  a  distinct  section,  while  the  other  clauses  of  compact 
concerning  citizens,  fugitives  from  justice,  and  fugitives 
from  service,  each  and  all  without  any  power  attached, 
by  a  natural  association  compose  but  a  single  section, 
thus ;  — 

1  MafliflMi's  Debiites,  Snpt.  3, 17S7. 


;db,Googlc 


REPEAL   OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  lol 

"  Artici^   IV. 

"Sectioh  1.  Full  faith  and  credit  shall  be  given  in  each 
State  to  the  public  acts,  records,  and  judicial  proceedings  of 
every  other  State.  And  the  Confess  may  hy  general  laws 
preseribe  the  manna-  in  which  such  acts,  records,  and  proceed- 
tTiffs  shall  he  proved,  and  the  ^ect  thereof. 

"  Section  2.  The  citizens  of  each  State  shall  he  entitled 
to  all  privileges  and  immunities  of  citizens  in  the  several 
States. 

"  A  person  charged  in  any  State  with  treason,  felony,  or 
other  crime,  who  shall  fiee  from  justice,  and  be  found  in  an- 
other State,  shall,  on  demand  of  the  Executive  authority  of 
the  State  from  which  he  fled,  be  dehvered  up,  to  be  removed 
to  the  State  having  jiu-isdiction  of  the  crime. 

"  No  person  held  to  service  or  labor  in  one  State,  under 
the  laws  thereof,  escaping  into  another,  shall,  in  consequence 
of  any  law  or  regulation  therein,  be  discharged  from  such 
service  or  labor,  but  shall  be  delivered,  up  on  claim  of  the 
party  to  whom  such  service  or  labor  may  be  due. 

"Sectioh  3.  New  States  may  be  admitted  6y  the  Congress 
into  this  Union ;  but  no  new  State  shall  be  formed  or  erected 
within  the  jiu-isdiction  of  any  other  State,  nor  any  State  be 
formed  by  the  junction  of  two  or  more  St-ates  or  parts  of 
States,  without  the  consent  of  the  Legislatures  of  the  States 
concerned,  as  well  as  of  the  Congress. 

"  Tlie  Congress  shall  have  power  to  dispose  of  and  make  all 
needftil  rules  and  regulations  respecting  the  territory  or  other 
property  belongii^  to  the  United  States ;  and  nothing  in 
this  Constitution  shall  be  so  construed  as  to  prejudice  any 
claims  of  the  United  States,  or  of  any  particular  State. 

"  Section  4.  The  United  States  s/tall  guaranty  to  every 
State  in  this  Union  a  republican  form  of  Government,  and 
sliall  protect  each  of  them  against  invasion,  and,  on  applica- 
tion of  the  Legislature,  or  of  the  Executive  (when  the  Legis- 
lature cannot  be  convened),  against  domestic  violence." 


■cibyGoogIc 


152         FEEEDOM  NATIONAL,   SLAVERY  SECTIONAL; 

Here  is  the  whole  article,  in  its  final  form.  It  will  be 
observed  that  the  third  section,  immediately  following 
the  triad  section  of  compacts,  contains  two  specific  pow- 
ers, —  one  with  regard  to  new  States,  and  the  other  with 
regard  to  the  public  Tenitory,  These  axe  naturally 
grouped  together,  while  the  fourth  section  of  this  same 
article,  which  is  distinct  in  character,  is  placed  by  itself. 
lu  the  absence  of  all  specifle  information,  reason  alone 
can  determine  why  this  arrangement  was  mada  But 
the  conclusion  is  obvious,  that,  in  the  view  of  the  Com- 
mittee and  of  the  Convention,  each  of  these  sections 
differs  from  the  others.  The  first  contains  a  compact 
with  a  grant  of  power.  The  second  contains  provisions, 
all  of  which  are  simple  compacts,  and  two  of  which  were 
confessedly  simple  compacts  in  the  old  Articles  of  Con- 
federation, from  which,  unchanged  in  character,  they 
were  borrowed.  The  third  is  a  twofold  grant  of  power 
to  Congress,  without  any  compact.  The  fourth  is  nei- 
ther power  nor  compact  merely,  nor  both  united,  but  a 
solemn  injunction  upon  the  National  Government  to 
perform  an  important  duty. 

The  framers  of  the  Constitution  were  wise  and  care- 
ful, having  a  reason  for  what  they  did,  and  understand- 
ing the  language  they  employed.  They  did  not,  after 
discussion,  incorporate  into  their  work  any  superfluous 
provision ;  nor  did  they  without  design  adopt  the  pecu- 
liar arrangement  in  which  it  appeals.  Adding  to  the 
record  compact  an  express  grant  of  power,  they  testified 
not  only  their  desire  for  such  power  in  Congress,  but 
their  conviction  that  without  such  express  grant  it 
would  not  exist.  But  if  express  grant  was  necessary  in 
this  case,  it  was  equally  necessary  in  all  the  other  cases. 
Exp^'essum,  facit  cessare  tacUuin.     Especially,  in  view  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


EErE,iL   OF  THE   FCGITIYE    SLAVE   ACT.  153 

its  odious  character,  was  it  necessary  in  the  case  of  fu- 
gitives from  service.  Abstaining  from  any  such  grant, 
and  then  grouping  the  bare  compact  with  other  similar 
compacts,  separate  from  every  gi-ant  of  power,  they  tes- 
tified theu'  purpose  most  significantly.  Not  only  do 
they  decline  all  addition  to  the  compact  of  any  such 
power,  but,  to  render  misapprehension  impossible,  to 
make  assurance  doubly  sure,  to  exclude  any  contrary 
conclusion,  they  punctiliously  arrange  the  clauses,  on 
the  principle  of  noscitur  a  sociis,  so  as  to  distinguish  all 
the  grants  of  power,  but  especially  to  make  the  new 
grant  of  power,  in  the  case  of  pubhc  records,  stand  forth 
in  the  front  by  itself,  severed  from  the  naked  compacts 
with  which  it  was  originally  associated. 

Thus  the  proceedings  of  the  Convention  show  that 
the  founders  understood  the  necessity  of  powers  in  cer- 
tain cases,  and,  on  consideration,  jealously  granted  them. 
A  closing  example  will  strengthen  the  ailment.  Con- 
gress is  expressly  empowered  "to  esiablish  an  unifonn 
nde  of  Naturalization,  and  uniform  laws  on  the  subject 
of  Bankraptcies,  throughout  the  Dnited  States."  "With- 
out this  provision  these  two  subjects  would  have  faRen 
within  the  control  of  the  States,  leaving  the  Nation 
powerless  to  esiahlish  a  uniform  rule  thereupon.  Now, 
instead  of  the  existing  compact  on  fugitives  from  ser- 
vice, it  would  have  been  easy,  had  any  such  desire  pre- 
vailed, to  add  this  case  to  the  clause  on  Naturalization 
and  Bankruptcies,  and  to  empower  Congress  to  estab- 
lish A  UNIFORM  RULE  FOR  THE  SURRENDER  OF  FUGI- 
TIVES FROM  SERVICE  THROUGHOUT  THE  UNITED  STATES. 
Then,  of  course,  whenever  Congress  undertook  to  exer- 
cise the  power,  all  State  control  of  the  subject  would 
The  National  Government  would  have 


■cibyGoogIc 


154         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,   SLAVERY  SECnONAL: 

been  conatituted,  lite  Nimrod,  the  mighty  Hunter,  witii 
power  to  gather  the  huntsmen,  to  halloo  the  pack,  and 
to  direct  the  chase  of  men,  ranging  at  will,  without 
regard  to  boundariea  or  jurisdictions,  throughout  all  the 
States.  But  no  person  in  the  Convention,  not  one  of 
the  reckless  partisans  of  Slavery,  was  so  audacious  as 
to  make  this  proposition.  Had  it  heen  distinctly  made, 
it  would  have  heen  as  distinctly  denied. 

The  fact  that  the  provision  on  this  subject  was  adopt- 
ed unanimoudy,  while  showing  the  httle  importance 
attached  to  it  in  tli»  shape  it  firudly  assumed,  testifies 
also  that  it  could  not  have  been  regarded  as  a  source 
of  National  power  for  Slavery.  It  will  be  remembered 
(Jiat  among  the  members  of  the  Convention  were  Gouver- 
neur  Morris,  who  had  said  that  he  "nevee  would  con- 
cur in  upholding  domestic  slavery," — Elbridge  Geny, 
who  thoi^ht  we  "  ought  to  be  careful  not  to  give  any 
sanction  to  it" — Eoger  Sherman,  who  "was  opposed  to 
a  tax  on  slaves  imported,  "because  it  implied  fh&y  lo&re 
property,"  —  James  Madison,  who  "  thoiaght  it  wrong  to 
admit  in  the  Constitution  the  idea  that  there  could  be 
property  in  men," — and  Benjamin  Franklin,  who  lik- 
ened American  slaveholders  to  Algeiine  corsairs.  In 
the  face  of  these  unequivocal  judgments,  it  is  absurd  to 
suppose  that  these  eminent  citizens  consented  unani- 
riiovsly  to  any  provision  by  which  the  National  Gov- 
ernment, the  creature  of  their  hands,  dedicated  to  Free- 
dom, could  become  the  most  offensive  ^ent  of  Sla- 
very. 

Thus  much  for  the  evidence  from  the  history  of  the 
Convention.  But  tlie  true  principles  of  our  Political 
System  are  in  harmony  with  this  conclusion  of  history ; 
and  here  let  me  say  a  word  of  State  Eights. 


■cibyGoogIc 


KEPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  155 

It  was  the  piupose  of  our  fathers  to  create  a  National 
riovernment,  and  to  endow  it  with  adequate  powers. 
They  had  known  the  perils  of  imbecility,  discord,  and 
confusion,  protraeted  through  the  uncertain  days  of  the 
Confederation,  and  they,  desii'ed  a  government  which 
should  be  a  true  bond  of  Union  and  an  efficient  oigan 
of  national  interests  at  home  and  abroad.  But  while 
fashionii^  this  agency,  tliey  fully  recc^nized  the  gov- 
ernments of  the  States.  To  the  Nation  were  delegated 
high  powers,  essential  to  the  national  interests,  but  spe- 
cific in  character  and  Umited  in  number.  To  the  States 
and  to  the  people  were  reserved  the  powers,  general  in 
character  and  unlimited  in  number,  not  delegated  to  the 
Nation  or  prolubited  to  the  States. 

The  integrity  of  our  Political  System  depends  upon 
harmony  in  the  operations  of  the  Nation  and  of  the 
States.  While  the  Nation  within  its  wide  orbit  is  su- 
preme, the  States  move  with  equal  supremacy  in  their 
own.  But,  from  the  necessity  of  the  case,  the  supremacy 
of  each  in  its  proper  place  excludes  the  other.  The 
Nation  cannot  exercise  rights  reserved  to  the  States, 
nor  can  the  States  interfere  with  the  powers  of  the 
Nation.  Any  such  action  on  either  side  is  a  usurpa- 
tion. These  principles  were  distinctly  declared  by  Mr. 
Jefferson  in  1*798,  in  words  often  adopted  since,  and 
which  must  find  acceptance  from  all  parties. 

"  That  the  several  States  composing  the  TJnitod  States  of 
America  are  not  united  on  the  principle  of  imlimited  aub- 
misaion  to  their  General  Government ;  but  that  hy  a  com- 
pact, under  the  style  and  title  of  a  Constitution  for  the 
United  States  and  of  Amendments  thereto,  they  constituted 
a  General  Government  for  special  purposes,  delegated  to  tliat 
Government  ceHatn  definite  powern,  reserving,  each  State  to 


■cibyGoogIc 


156  FREEDOM  KATIONAI,,   SLAVERY   SECTIONAL: 

itself,  the  residuary  mass  of  right  to  their  own  self-govern- 
ment; and  that  whensoever  the  General  Governmeiit  assumes 
undelegated  powers,  its  acts  are  waamihoritative,  void,  and  of 

1  have  already  amply  shown  to-day  that  Slavery  19  in 
no  respect  national, — tliat  it  is  not  within  the  sphere 
of  national  activity,  —  that  it  has  no  "  positive  "  support 
in  the  Constitution,  —  and  that  any  interpretation  in- 
consistent vrith  this  principle  would  be  abhorrent  to  the 
sentiments  of  its  founders.  Slavery  is  a  local  institu- 
tion, peculiar  to  the  States,  and  under  the  guardianship 
of  State  Eights.  It  is  impossible,  without  violence  to 
the  spirit  and  letter  of  tlie  Constitution,  to  claim  for 
Congress  any  power  to  legislate  either  for  its  abolition 
in  the  States  or  its  support  anywhere.  Non-Inte^-ven- 
tion  is  the  rule  prescribed  to  the  Nation.  Regarding 
the  question  in  its  more  general  aspects  only,  and  put- 
ting aside,  for  the  moment,  the  perfect  evidence  from 
the  records  of  the  Convention,  it  is  palpable  that  there 
is  no  national  fountain  out  of  which  the  existing  Slave 
Act  can  possibly  spring. 

But  this  Act  is  not  only  an  unwarrantable  assump- 
tion of  power  by  the  Nation,  it  is  also  an  infraction  of 
rightiS  reserved  to  the  States.  Everywhere  within  their 
borders  the  States  are  the  peculiar  guardians  oi;p6Tsonal 
Merty.  By  Jury  and  Habeas  Corpus  to  save  the  citizen 
harmless  against  all  assault  is  among  their  duties  and 
rights.  To  hia  State  the  citizen,  when  oppre^ed,  may 
appeal ;  nor  should  he  find  that  appeal  denied.  But  this 
Act  despoils  him  of  rights,  and  despoils  his  State  of  all 
power  to  protect  him.     It  subjects  him  to  the  wretched 

1  Kentacky  Resoluiiona  of  1788;  Jefferaoti's  Writings,  Vol.  IX.  p.  164. 
See  niao  Elliot's  Debates,  VoL  IV.,  Appendix,  p.  SSO. 


;db,Googlc 


REPEAL  OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  157 

cliance  of  false  oaths,  foiged  papers,  and  facile  commis- 
sioners, and  takes  from  liim  every  safeguard.  Now,  if 
the  slaveholder  has  a  right  to  he  secure  at  home  in  the 
enjoyment  of  Slavsry,  so  also  has  the  freeman  of  the 
North  —  and  eveiy  person  there  is  piesimaed  to  be  a 
freeman  —  an  e^ytsi  right  to  be  secure  at  honie  in  the 
enjoyment  of  Freedom.  The  same  principle  of  State 
Eights  by  -which  Slavery  is  protected  in  the  Slave  States 
throws  an  impenetrable  shield  over  Freedom  in  the  Free 
States.  And  here,  let-me  say,  is  the  only  security  for 
Slavery  in  the  Slave  States,  as  for  Freedom  in  the  Free 
States.  In  the  present  fatal  overthrow  of  State  Eights 
you  teach  a  lesson  which  may  return  to  pl^ue  the 
teacher.  Compelling  the  National  Government  to 
stretch  its  Briarean  arms  into  the  Free  States  for  the 
sake  of  Slavery,  you  show  openly  how  it  may  stretch 
these  same  hundred  giant  arms  into  the  Slave  States 
for  the  sake  of  Freedom.  This  lesson  was  not  taught 
by  our  fathers. 

Here  I  end  this  branch  of  the  c[uestion.  The  true 
principles  of  onr  Political  System,  the  history  of  the 
National  Convention,  the  natural  interpretation  of  the 
Constitution,  all  teach  that  this  Act  is  a  usurpation  by 
Congress  of  powers  that  do  not  belong  to  it,  and  an  in- 
fraction of  rights  secured  to  the  States.  It  is  a  sword, 
whose  handle  is  at  the  National  Capital,  and  whose 
point  is  every^vhere  in  the  States.  A  weapon  so  ter- 
rible to  Personal  Liberty  the  Nation  has  no  power  to 
grasp. 

(2.)  And  now  of  the  denial  of  Trial  hj  Jury. 
Admitting,  for  the  moment,  that  Congress  is  intrusted 
with  power  over  this  subject,  which  truth  disowns,  still 


■cibyGoogIc 


158         FHEiiDOM  NATIONAL^   SLAVERY  SECTIOHAL. 

the  Act  is  again  radically  imeonstitutional  from  its 
denial  of  Trial  by  Jury  in  a  cLueation  of  Personal  Lib- 
erty and  a  suit  at  Common  Law.  Since  on  the  one 
side  there  13  a  claim  of  property,  and  on  the  other  of 
liberty,  both  property  and  liberty  arc  involved  in  the 
issue.  To  this  claim  on  either  side  is  attached  Trial 
by  Jury. 

To  me.  Sir,  regarding  this  matter  in  the  light  of  the 
Common  Law  and  in  the  blaze  of  free  institutions,  it  has 
always  seemed  impossible  to  arrive  at  any  other  conclu- 
sion. If  the  language  of  the  Constitution  were  open  to 
doubt,  which  it  is  not,  still  all  the  presumptions  of  law, 
ail  the  leanings  to  Freedom,  all  the  suggestions  of  jus- 
tice, plead  angel-tongued  for  this  right.  Kobody  doubts- 
that  Congress,  if  it  legislates  on  this  matter,  may  allow 
a  Trial  by  Jury.  But  if  it  may,  so  overwhelming  is  the 
claim  of  justice,  it  must.  Beyond  this,  however,  the 
question  ia  determined  by  the  precise  letter  of  the  Con- 
stitution. 

Several  expressions  in  the  provision  for  the  surrender 
of  fugitives  from  service  show  the  essential  character  of 
the  jiroceedings.  In  the  first  place,  the  person  must 
be,  not  merely  charged,  as  in  the  case  of  fugitives  from 
justice,  but  actually  hdd  to  service  in  the  State  from 
which  he  escaped.  In  the  second  place,  he  must  "be 
delivered  up  on  claim  of  the  party  to  whom  such  ser- 
vice or  labor  may  be  due"  These  two  facts,  that  he  was 
held  to  service,  and  that  his  service  was  due  to  his  claim- 
ant, are  directly  placed  in  issue,  and  must  be  proved. 
Two.  necessary  incidents  of  the  delivery  may  also  be 
observed.  Tirst,  it  is  made  in  the  State  where  the 
fugitive  is  found ;  and,  secondly,  it  restores  to  the 
claimant  complete  control  over  the  person  of  the  fugi- 


■cibyGooglc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  159 

tive.  From  these  circumstances  it  is  evident  that  the 
proceedings  cannot  be  regarded,  in  any  just  sense,  as 
preliminary,  or  ancillary  to  some  future  formal  trial, 
hut  as  complete  in  themselves,  final  and  conclusive. 

These  proceedii^s  determine  on  the  one  side  tha 
question  of  Property,  and  on  the  other  the  sacred  quesi 
tion  of  Personal  Liberty  in  its  most  transcendent  form, 
—  Liberty  not  merely  for  a  day  or  a  year,  but  for  life, 
and  the  Liberty  of  generations  that  shall  come  after,  so 
long  as  Slavery  endures.  To  these  questions  the  Consti- 
tution, by  two  specific  provisions,  attaches  Trial  by  Jury. 
One  ia  the  familiar  clause,  already  adduced :  "  No  per- 
son shall  be  deprived  of  life,  liberty,  or  property,  without 
dueprocess  of  law," — that  is,  without  due  proceeding  at 
law,  with  Trial  by  Jury.  Not  stopping  to  dwell  on 
this,  I  press  at  once  to  the  other  provision,  which  is  still 
more  express :  "  In  suits  at  Common  Law,  where  the 
value  in  controversy  shall  exceed  twenty  dollars,  the 
right  of  Trial  by  Jury  shall  bo  presented."  Tliis  clause, 
which  does  not  appear  in  the  Constitution  as  first 
adopted,  was  suggested  by  the  very  spirit  of  Freedom. 
At  the  close  of  the  National  Convention,  Elbridge  Gerry 
refused  to  sign  the  Constitution  because,  among  other 
things,  it  established  "  a  tribunal  without  Juries,  a  Star 
Chamber  as  to  civil  cases."  ^  Many  united  in  his  op- 
position, and  on  the  recommendation  of  the  First  Con- 
gress this  additional  safeguard  was  adopted  as  an  amend- 
ment. 

Now,  regarding  the  question  as  one  of  Property,  or  of 

Personal  Liberty,  in  eiUier  alternative  the  Trial  by  Jury 

is  secured.     For  this  position  authority  is  ample.     In 

the  debate  on  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill  of  1S17-18,  a 

1  Uadison'B  Debates,  Sept.  IB,  1T8T. 


■cibyGoogIc 


160         TREEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

Senator  from  South  Carolina,  Mr.  Smith,  anxious  for 
the  asserted  right  of  property,  objected,  on  this  veiy 
floor,  to  a  reference  of  the  q^uestion,  under  the  writ  of 
Habeas  Corpus,  to  a  judge  without  a  jury.  Speaking 
solely  for  Property,  these  were  his  words. 

"This  would  give  a  judge  the  sole  power  of  deciding 
the  right  of  property  the  master  claims  in  his  slave,  instead  of 
trying  tJiat  right  hy  a  jury,  as  prescribed  by  the  Constitution. 
He  would  be  judge  of  matters  of  law  and  matters  of  fa«t, 
clothed  with  all  the  powers  of  a  jury  as  well  as  the  powers 
of  a  court,  Such  a  principle  is  unknown  in  your  system  of 
jurisprudence.  Your  Constituiion,  has  forbid  it.  It  preserves 
the  right  of  Trial  by  Jury  iu  all  cases  whei-e  the  value  in 
controveray  exceeds  twenty  dollars."  * 

But  this  provision  has  been  repeatedly  discussed  by 
the  Supreme  Court,  so  that  its  meaning  is  not  open  to 
doubt.  Three  conditions  are  necessary ;  first,  the  pro- 
ceeding must  be  "a  suit";  secondly,  "at  Common  Law"; 
and,  thirdly,  "where  the  value  in  controversy  exceeds 
twenty  dollars."  In  every  sueh  case  "  the  right  of  Trial 
by  Juiy  shall  he  preserved."  Judgments  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  cover  each  of  these  points 

First.  In  the  case  of  Cohens  \  Vugmia  (6  "VVheaton, 
407),  the  Court  say:  "What  is  %  suit  ^  We  under- 
stand it  to  be  the  prosecution  or  puisuit  of  some  claim, 
demand,  or  request."  Of  course  then  the  'claim"  for 
a  fugitive  must  be  a  "suit." 

Secondly.  In  the  case  of  Parsons  v.  Bedford  et  ai. 
(3  PeteiB,  447),  while  considering  this  very  clause, 
the  Court  say :  "  By  Common  Law  the  framera  of  the 
Constitution  meant  ....  not  merely  suits  which  the 

1  Aminla  of  Congress,  16th  Coug,  1st  Sess.,  Marth  6,  1B18,  ool.  232. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLA.VE  ACT.  161 

Common  Law  recognized  amoi^  its  old  and  settled 
pvoeeedings,  but  suits  in  -which  legal  rights  were  to  be 

ascertained  and  determined In  a  just  sense,  the 

Amendment  may  well  be  construed  to  embrace  all  suits 
which  are  not  of  Equity  and  Admiralty  jurisdiction, 
■wlmtemr  may  be  the  peculiar  form  which  they  moAj  cmame 
to  settle  legal  rights."  Now,  since  the  claim  for  a  fugi- 
tive is  not  a  suit  in  Equity  or  Admiralty,  but  a  suit  to 
settle  what  are  called  l^al  rights,  it  must  be  a  "  suit 
at  Common  Law." 

Thirdly.  In  the  case  of  Zee  v.  Zee  (8  P.eters,  44),  on 
a  question  whether  "the  value  in  controversy"  was 
"one  thousand  dollars  or  upwards,"  it  was  objected, 
timt  the  appellants,  who  were  petitioners  for  Freedom, 
were  not  of  tlie  value  of  one  thousand  dollars.  But  the 
Court  said :  "  The  matter  in  dispute  is  the  Freedom  of 

the  petitioners This  is  not  susceptible  of  a  pecuniary 

.  Wo  entertain  no  doubt  of  the  jurisdic- 


tion of  the  Court."  ^  Of  course,  then,  since  Liberty  is 
above  price,  the  claim  to  any  fugitive  always  and  neces- 
sarily presumes  that  "the  value  in  controversy  exceeds 
twenty  dollara." 

By  these  successive  steps,  sustained  by  juf^ments  of 
the  h^hest  tribunal,  it  appears,  as  in  a  diagram,  that  the 
right  of  Trial  by  Jury  is  secured  to  the  fugitive  from 
service. 

This  conclusion  needs  no  additional  authority;  but 
it  receives  curious  illustration  from  the  ancient  records 

1  The  rde  of  the  Roman  law  waa  aspUoit!  Neipit  hamawm  fserU  ob 
rei  pecuniaruB  qnattioneBt  Ubertali  nKU-am  jJeW.  This  is  ft  text  of  Opian 
(Digostorum  Lib.  XL.  Tit.  V.,  De  FidekomviiasariU  LUertatibui,  37).    In 


■cibyGoogIc 


162         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

of  the  Common  Law,  so  familiar  and  dear  to  the  fram- 
ers  of  the  Constitution.  Jt  is  said  by  Mr.  Burke,  in 
his  magnificent  speech  on  Conciliation  with  America, 
that  "nearly  as  many  of  Blackstone's  Commentaries 
were  sold  in  America  as  in  England,"  ^  carrying  thitlier 
the  knowledge  of  those  vital  principles  of  I'reedom 
■which  were  the  toast  of  the  British  Constitution.  Thus 
imbued,  the  earliest  Continental  Coi^ess,  in  1774, 
declared,  "  That  the  respective  Colonies  are  entitled  to 
the  Common  law  of  England,  and  more  especially  to 
the  great  and  inestimable  privilege  of  being  tried  by 
their  Peers  of  the  Vicinage,  according  to  the  course  of 
that  law."  3  Amidst  the  troubles  which  heralded  tlie 
Eevolution,  the  Common  Law  was  claimed  as  a  birth- 
right. 

Now,  although  the  Common  Law  may  not  be  ap- 
proached as  a  sonree  of  jurisdiction  under  tlje  Katioual 
Constitution,  —  and  on  this  interesting  topic  I  forbear 
to  dwell,  —  it  is  clear  tliat  it  may  he  employed  to  deter- 
mim  tlie  meaning  of  technical  terms  in  the  Constitution 
borrowed  from  this  law.  This,  indeed,  is  expressly  sanc- 
tioned by  Mr.  Madison,  in  his  celebrated  Eeport  of  1799, 
while  limiting  the  extent  to  which  the  Common  Law 
may  be  employed.  Thus  by  this  law  we  learn  the 
nature  of  Trial  hy  Jury,  which,  though  secured,  is  not 
described  by  the  Constitution ;  also  what  are  Attainder, 
Sabeas  Corpus,  and  Impeachmmt,  all  technical  terms  of 
the  Constitution,  borrowed  from  the  Common  Law.  By 
this  law,  and  its  associate  Chancery,  we  learn  what  are 
cases  in  law  and  equity  to  which  the  judicial  power  of 

;  Joumiils  of  Congiess,  Vol.  L 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE   ACT.  163 

the  United  States  is  extended.  These  instances  I  ad- 
duce merely  for  example.  Also  in  the  same  way  we 
leain  what  are  suits  at  Gommim  Law. 

Now,  on  principle  and  authority,  a  claim  for  the 
delivery  of  afvffitive  slave  is  a  suit  ai  Common  Law,  and 
is  embraced  naturally  and  necessarily  in  this  class  of 
judicial  proceedii^.  This  proposition  can  he  placed 
heyottd  question.  And  here,  especially,  let  me  ask  the 
attention  of  all  learned  in  the  law.  On  this  point,  as 
on  every  other  in  this  argument,  I  challenge  inquiry  and 
answer. 

History  painfully  records,  that,  during  the  early  days 
of  the  Common  Law,  and  down  even  to  a  late  period,  a 
system  of  Slavery  existed  in  England,  known  under  the 
name  of  villenage.  The  slave  was  generally  called  a 
villein,  though  in  the  original  Latin  forms  of  judicial 
proceedings  he  was  termed  nativus,  implying  slavery 
hy  hirth.  The  incidents  of  this  condition  are  minutely 
described,  and  also  the  mutual  remedies  of  master  and 
.  slave,  all  of  which  were  regulated  hy  the  Common  Law. 
Slaves  sometimes  then,  as  now,  escaped  from  their  mas- 
ters. The  claim  for  them,  after  such  escape,  was  prose- 
cuted hy  a  "  suit  at  Common  Law,"  to  which,  as  to  ev- 
ery suit  at  Common  Law,  Trial  by  Jury  was  necessarily 
attached.  Blackstone,  in  his  Commentaries,  in  words 
which  must  liave  been  known  to  aU  the  lawyers  of  the 
Convention,  said  of  villeins :  "  They  could  not  leave 
their  lord  without  his  permission ;  but  if  tliey  ran  away, 
or  were  purloined  from  him,  miyht  he  CLAIMED  and  re- 
covered hy  ACTION,  nice  heasts  or  other  chattels."^  This 
very  word,  "action,"  of  itself  implies  "a  suit  at  Com- 
mon Law  "  with  Trial  hy  Jury, 

'  CommeiilariBs,  Vol.  IL  p.  98. 


■cibyGoogIc 


164  FEEEDOM    NATIONAL,    SLAVEEY   SECTIONAL: 

F  0  o  otl  e  au  «&  el  arn  j  e  elj  li  t  tl  e 
atw  was  That  gre  t  e  po  uder  of  the  ane  e  t  law 
Mr  Hi^  e  9a}8  3ir  le  Books  and  Books  of 
Entr  e  i  e  full  ot  the  fo  ms  sed  m  jleidin^  a  t  tie 
to  ville  na  regardint  Tho  „1  no  lo  ^,6  of  imot  oil 
value  m  En^Ian  i  tl  ej  e  nau  as  non  menta  of  juns 
fr  lence  aul  s  n  em  nto  ot  a  larl  ro  s  mst  t  t 
He  th  lb  des  1  es  tl  e  eui  dy  of  the  aste  at  C  o  uiu  n 
Law 

The  lords  lemedy  for  a.  fv^itive  idlan  was  either  by 
seizure  or  by  suing  out  a  writ  of  Nativo  Ilahendo,  or  Neifty, 
ae  it  ia  sometimes  called.  If  the  lord  seized,  the  villein's 
most  effectual  mode  of  recovering  liberty  was  by  the  writ  of 
Homine  Jtepleffiando,  which  had  great  advantage  over  the 
writ  of  Habeas  Corpiis,  In  the  Hahem  Corpus  the  return 
cannot  be  contested  by  pleading  against  the  truth  of  it,  and 
consequently  on  a  Haheoi  Carpus  the  questioTi  of  liberty  canr 
not  go  to  a  jury  for  trial  ....  But  in  the  Homine  R^leffi- 
ando  it  was  otherwisa  ....  The  plaintiff,  ....  on  the  de- 
fendant's pleading  the  villenage,  had  the  same  opportunity 
of  contesting  it  as  when  impleaded  by  the  lord  in  a  Nativo 
Hdbmido.  If  the  lord  sued  out  a  Naiivo  Habendo,  and  the 
villenage  was  denied,  in  which  case  the  Bheriff  could  not 
seize  the  villein,  the  lord  looi  tliea  to  enter  his  plaiitt  in  the 
county  court;  and  as  the  sheriff  was  not  allowed  to  try  the 
question  of  villenage  in  his  court,  the  lord  could  not  have 
any  benefit  from  the  writ,  without  removing  the  canae  by 
the  writ  of  Pone  into  the  King's  Bench  or  Common  Pleas."* 

The  authority  of  Mr.  Hargrave  ia  sufficient.  But 
I  mean  to  place  this  matter  beyond  all  caviL  From 
the  D^est  of  Lord  Chief  Baron  Corayns,  which  at  the 

1  Argument  in  Somraarsett's  Case;  Howell's  State  Trials,  XX.  43. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  165 

adoption  of  the  Coustitution  was  among  the  classics  of 
OUT  jurisprudence,  I  derive  another  description  of  tlie 
remedy. 

"If  the  lord  claims  aa  inheritaace  in  his  viilein,  tohojiies 
from  his  lord  against  his  will,  and  lives  in  a  place  out  of  the 
manor  to  which  he  is  regardant,  the  lord  shall  have  a  Nativo 
Habendo.  And  upon  such  writ,  directed  to  the  sheriff,  he 
may  seize  him  who  does  not  deny  himself  to  be  a  vOleiu. 
But  if  the  defendant  say  that  he  is  a  freeman,  the  sheriff 
cannot  seize  him,  but  the  lord  must  remove  the  writ  by  Pone 
before  the  Justices  in  Eyre,  or  in  C.  B.,  where  he  must  count 
upon  it." ' 

An  eai'ly  writer  of  peculiar  authority,  Fitzhertert,  in 
his  Nat-ura  Breviurrh,  on  the  writs  of  the  Common  Law, 
thus  describes  these  t 


"  The  writ  de  N'ativo  Habendo  lieth  for  the  lord  who  claim- 
eth  inheritance  in  any  villein,  v)hen.  his  villein  is  rim  from 
him,  and  is  remaining  within  any  place  out  of  the  manor 
unto  which  he  is  regardant,  or  when  he  departeth  from  his 
lord  against  the  lord's  will ;  and  tlie  writ  shall  be  directed 
unto  the  sheriff. ....  And  the  sheriff  may  seize  the  villein, 
and  deliver  him  unto  his  lord,  if  the  villein  confess  unto 
the  sheriff  that  he  is  his  villein ;  but  if  the  villein  say  to 
the  sheriff  that  he  is  frank,  then  it  se  meth  that  the  sheriff 
ought  not  to  seize  him  r  as  it  is  in  a  replevin,  if  the  defend- 
ant claim  property,  the  sherifT  cannot  replevy  the  cattle,  but 
the  party  ought  to  sue  a  writ  de  PropriAate  Prohanda  ;  and 
so  if  the  villein  say  that  he  is  a  freeman,  &c.,  then  the 
sheriff  ought  not  to  seize  him,  hut  then  the  lord  ought  to 
sue  a  Pone  to  remove  the  plea  before  the  Justices  in  the 
Common  Pleas,  or  before  the  Justices  in  Eyre.  But  if  the 
villein  purchase  a  writ  <!e  Lihertate  Prohanda  before  the  lord 

1  Comyna'B  Digest:  Remedy  for  a  Villein,  {0. 1,)  N'ativo  Habendo. 


■cibyGoogIc 


166  FEEEDOM  HAnONAL,    SLAVERY    SECTIONAL: 

hath  sued  the  Pone  to  remove  the  plea  before  the  Justices, 
then  that  writ  of  Liberiate  Probanda  is  a  Supersedeas  unto 
the  lord,  that  he  proceed  not  upon  the  writ  of  Naiivo  Ra- 
bendo  till  the  Ejre  of  the  Justices,  or  till  the  day  of  the  plea 
be  adjourned  before  the  Juaticea,  and  that  the  lord  ought 
not  to  seize  the  villein  in  the  mean  time."* 

Tliese  authorities  are  not  merely  applicable  to  the 
general  q^uestion  of  freedom,  but  they  distinctly  con- 
template the  case  of  fugitive  slaves,  and  the  "suits  at 
Common  Law  "  for  their  rendition.  Elaokstone  speaks 
of  villeins  who  "ran  away";  Haigrave  of  "fi^tive  vil- 
leins"; Comyns  of  a  villein  "who  flies  from  hia  lord 
against  his  will";  and  Fitzhetbert  of  the  proceedings 
of  the  lord  "when  his  villein  is  run  from  him."  The 
fonns,  writs,  counts,  pleadings,  and  judgments  in  these 
svuts  are  all  preserved  among  the  precedents  of  the 
Common  Law.  The  writs  are  known  as  original  writs, 
which  the  party  on  either  side,  at  the  proper  stage, 
could  sue  out  of  right  without  showing  cause.  The 
■writ  of  Lihertate  Probanda  for  a  fugitive  slave  was  in 
this  form :  — 

"  LiBBRTATH  PROBANDA. 

"The  king  to  the  sheriff,  &c.  A.  and  B.  her  sister  have 
showed  unto  us,  that,  whoreas  they  are  free  women,  and 
ready  to  prove  their  liberty,  F.,  claiming  them  to  be  his  neife 

J  istlj  th  d  th      f       w  m     d  J        th  t 

f  tl     if  d  4       d  B    bTJl  n    k    J  t      h    t,  tl 

pro      g    f  th       1  b  -ty  th      p  t  that  pi      b  f  j 

t  ce      t  tl     fl    t  -u  wh  n  tl   J     1    II  com        t     tl 

l.tbca  pfttl  kdllj,th  ttj  t 
tl^  dti  t  tl  dAdBt 

h       pe       th       p  dtlltfafwiditlth        j 

FtzUbrtN  B      mnVIIpTT 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  167 

be  there,  if  he  will,  to  prosecute  hia  plea  thereof  against  the 
aforraaid  A.  and  B.    And  have  there  this  writ.   Witness,  &o,"  ^ 

By  these  vajioua  proceedings,  all  ending  in  Trial  ty 
Jury,  Personal  Liberty  was  guarded,  even  in  the  un- 
refined and  barbarous  days  of  the  early  Common  Law. 
Any  person  claimed  as  a  fugitive  slave  might  involve 
this  IWal  as  a  sacred  r^ht.  Whetlier  the  master  pro- 
ceeded by  aeizui'e,  as  he  might,  or  by  legal  process.  Trial 
by  Jury,  in  a  suit  afc  Common  Law,  before  one  of  the  high 
courts  of  the  realm,  was  equally  secured.  In  the  case 
of  seizure,  the  fugitive,  reversing  the  proceedings,  might 
institute  process  against  his  master,  and  appeal  to  a 
Court  and  Jury.  In  the  case  of  process  by  the  master, 
the  watchful  law  secured  to  the  fugitive  the  same  pro- 
tection. By  no  urgency  of  force,  by  no  device  of  pro- 
cess, could  any  person  claimed  as  a  slave  be  defrauded 
of  this  Trial  Such  was  the  Common  Law.  If  its  early 
boast,  that  there  could  be  no  slaves  in  England,  fails  to 
be  true,  tliis  at  least  may  be  its  pride,  —  that,  accorduig 
to  its  indisputable  principles,  the  liberty  of  every  man 
was  placed  under  the  guard  of  Trial  by  Jury. 

These  things  may  seem  new  to  us ;  but  they  must 
have  been  known  to  the  members  of  the  Convention, 
particularly  to  those  from  South  Carolina,  through  whose 
influence  the  provision  on  this  subject  was  adopted. 
Charles  Cotesworth  Pinckney  and  Mr,  Kutledge  had 
studied  law  at  the  Temple,  one  of  the  English  Inns  of 
Court.  It  would  be  a  discredit  to  them,  and  also  to 
other  learned  lawyers,  members  of  the  Convention,  to 
suppose  that  they  were  not  conversant  with  the  princi- 
ples and  precedents  dii'ectly  applicable  to  this  svtbject, 
aH  of  which  are  set  down  in  works  of  aeknowIe%ed 
I  Fitzherbort,  Vol.  I.  p.  77. 


■cibyGoogIc 


168  FEEEDOM   NATIONAL,    SLAVERY   SECTIONAL: 

authority,  and  at  that  time  of  constant  professional 
study.  Only  a  short  time  hefore,  in  the  case  of  Sommer- 
sett,  they  had  heeii  most  elaborately  examined  in  "West- 
minster Hall.  In  a  forensic  effort  of  imsurpassed  learn- 
ing and  elevation,  which  of  itself  vindicates  for  its  au- 
thor liis  great  juridical  name,  Mr.  Hai^ave  had  fuUy 
made  them  known  to  sach  as  were  little  acquainted 
with  the  more  ancient  sources.  But  even  if  we  could 
suppose  them  unknoivn  to  the  lawyers  of  the  Conven- 
tion, they  are  none  the  less  applicable  in  determining 
the  true  meaning  of  the  Constitution. 

The  conclusion  is  expUcit.  Clearly  and  indisputably, 
in  England,  the  country  of  the  Common  Law,  a  claim  for 
a  fugitive  slave  was  "  a  suit  at  Common  Law,"  recognized 
"among  its  old  and  settled  proceedings,"  To  question 
this,  in  the  face  of  authentic  principles  and  precedents, 
is  preposterous.  As  well  might  it  be  questioned,  that  a 
■writ  of  replevin  for  a  horse,  or  a  writ  of  right  for  land, 
■was  "  a  suit  at  Common  Law."  It  follows,  then,  that  this 
technical  term  of  the  Constitution,  read  in  the  illumi- 
nation of  the  Common  Law,  naturally  and  necessarily 
embraces  proceedii^  for  the  recovery  of  fugitive  slaves, 
*/^  ani/  such  he  instituted  or  allowed  -n/nder  the  Oonstitit- 
tion.  And  thus,  by  the  letter  of  the  Constitution,  in 
harmony  vifith  the  requirements  of  the  Common  Law, 
all  such  persons,  when  claimed  by  then:  masters,  are  en- 
titled to  Trial  by  Jury. 

Such,  Sir,  is  the  ailment,  briefly  uttered,  against  the 
constitutionality  of  the  Slave  Act  Much  more  I  might 
say  on  this  matter ;  much  more  on  the  two  chief  grounds 
of  objection  which  I  have  occupied  But  I  am  admon- 
ished to  hasten  on. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  169 

Opposing  fcliis  Act  as  do^iblj  uneonatitutional  from  the 
want  of  power  in  Congress  and  from  the  denial  of  Trial 
by  Jury,  I  find  myself  again  encouraged  by  tbe  example 
of  our  Revolutionary  Fathers,  in  a  ease  which  is  a  land- 
mark of  liistory.  The  parallel  is  important  and  com- 
plete. In  1765,  the  British  Parliament,  by  a  notorious 
statute,  attempted  to  draw  money  from  the  Colonies 
through  a  stamp  tax,  while  the  determination  of  certain 
questions  of  forfeiture  under  the  statute  was  "delegated, 
not  to  the  Courts  of  Common  Law,  but  to  Courts  of 
Admiralty  without  a  jury.  The  Stamp  Act,  now  exe- 
crated by  aU  lovers  of  Liberty,  had  this  extent  and  no 
more.  Its  passage  was  the  signal  for  a  general  flame 
of  opposition  and  indignation  tliroughout  the  Colonies. 
It  was  denounced  as  contrary  to  the  British  Constitu- 
tion, on  two  principal  grounds :  first,  as  a  usurpation  by 
Parliament  of  powers  not  belonging  to  it,  and  an  infrac- 
tion of  rights  secured  to  the  Colonies ;  and,  secondly,  as 
a  denial  of  Trial  by  Jury  in  certain  cases  of  property. 

The  public  feeling  was  variously  expressed.  At  Bos- 
ton, on  the  day  the  Act  was  to  take  effect,  the  shops 
were  closed,  the  bells  of  the  churches  tolled,  and  the 
flags  of  the  ships  hung  at  half-mast.  At  Portsmouth, 
in  New  Hampshire,  the  bells  were  tolled,  and  the  friends 
of  Liberty  were  summoned  to  hold  themselves  in  read- 
iness for  her  funeral.  At  New  York,  the  obnoxious 
Act,  headed  "  FoUy  of  England  and  Ruin  of  America," 
was  contemptuously  hawked  about  the  streets.  Bodies 
of  patriots  were  oiganized  everywhere  under  the  name 
of  "  Sons  of  Liberty."  The  merchants,  inspired  then  by 
Liberty,  resolved  to  import  no  more  goods  from  Eng- 
land until  the  repeal  of  the  Act.  The  orators  also 
spoke.  James  Otis  with  fiery  tongue  a 
Charta. 


■cibyGoogIc 


170         FREEDOM  NATIONAX,   SLAVEEY  SECTIONAL: 

Of  all  the  states,  Viigiuia  — whose  shield  bears  the 
image  of  Liberty  trampling  upon  chains  —  iirst  declared 
herself  hy  solemn  resolutions,  which  the  timid  thought 
"treasonable,"^  but  which  soon  found  response.  New 
York  followed;  Massachusetts  came  next,  speaking  by 
the  pen  of  the  inflexible  Samuel  Adams.  In  an  Ad- 
dress from  tlie  Legislature  to  the  Governor,  the  true 
grounds  of  opposition  to  the  Stamp  Act,  coincident  with 
the  two  radical  objections  to  the  Slave  Act,  ai'e  clearly 
set  forth. 

"  You  are  pleaBed  to  say  that  the  Stamp  Act  is  an  Act  of 
Parliament,  and  as  such  ought  to  be  observed.  This  House, 
Sir,  has  too  groat  a  reverence  for  the  Supreme  Legislature  of 
the  nation  to  question  its  just  authority.  It  by  no  meaoa  ap- 
pertains to  U8  to  pr^ume  to  a4just  the  boundaries  of  the 
power  of  Parliament ;  hut-  boundaries  there  ■andoiibtedly  are. 
We  hope  we  may  without  offence  put  your  Excellency  in 
mind  of  that  most  grievous  sentence  of  excommunication 
solemnly  denounced  by  the  Church  in  the  name  of  the  Sa- 
cred Trinity,  in  the  presence  of  King  Henry  the  Third  and 
the  estates  of  the  realm,  against  all  tJwse  who  should  Toake 
utatutes,  on  obsbbve  them,  being  made,  contrary  to  the  liber- 
ties of  Magna  Ckarta.  ....  The  Charter  of  this  Province 
invests  the  General  Assembly  with  the  power  of  making  laws 
for  its  internal  government  and  taxation;  and  this  Charter  has 
never  yet  been  forfeited.    The  Parliament  has  a  right  to  make 

all  laws  within  the  limits  of  their  own  constitution 

The  people  complain  that  the  Act  invests  a  single  judge  of 
the  Admiralty  with  a  power  to  try  and  determine  their  prop- 
erty, in  controversies  arising  fi:om  internal  concerns,  without 
a  jury,  contrary  to  the  very  expression  of  Magna  Charta,  that 
no  freeman  shall  be  amerced  but  by  the  oath  of  good  and 

lawful  men  of  the  vicinage We  deeply  regret  it  that 

1  HuteliiiisOD,  History  of  MassRchnsetts,  Vol.  IIL  p.  119. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL    OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE    ACT.  171 

the  P  irliiment  has  ^een  fit  to  pass  euch  an  act  as  tbe  Stamp 
ict  we  flattei  ouiaelves  that  the  hardships  of  it  will  shortly 
appear  to  them  m  such  a  point  of  light  as  shall  induce  them, 
m  their  wisdom  to  lepeal  it;  in  the  mean  time  we  mmt  heg 
yjir  Excellticy  to  etcuse  us  from,  doing  anything  to  assist 
in  the  e-xecutwn  of  it    ' 

Thus  in  those  days  spoke  Massachusetts.  The  par- 
allel still  pioceeds.  The  unconstitutional  Stamp  Act 
was  welcomed  in  the  Colonies  by  the  Tories  of  that  day 
precisely  as  the  unconstitutional  Slave  Act  is  welcomed 
by  large  and  imperious  numbers  among  us.  Hutchin- 
son, at  that  time  Lieutenant-Governor  and  Chief-Justice 
of  Massachusetts,  wrote  to  Ministers  in  England  :  "  The 
Stamp  Act  is  received  among  us  with  as  much  decency 
as  could  be  expected.  It  leaves  no  room  for  evasion, 
and  win  execute  itself."  ^  Like  the  Judges  of  our  day, 
in  chaises  to  grand  juries,  he  resolutely  vindicated  the 
Act,  and  admonished  "the  jurors  and  people"  to  obey.^ 
Like  Governors  of  our  day,  Bernard,  in  his  speech  to  the 
Legislature  of  Massach\isetts,  demanded  unreasoning  sub- 
mission.   "  I  shall  not,"  says  this  British  Governor, "  enter 

into  any  disquisition  of  the  policy  of  the  Act 

I  have  only  to  say  that  it  is  an  Act  of  the  Parliament  of 
Great  Britain ;  .  .  .  .  and  I  trust  that  the  supremacy  of 
that  Parliament  over  all  the  members  of  their  wide  and 
diffused  empire  never  was  and  never  will  be  denied 
within  these  walls."*  The  military  were  against  tlie 
people.     A  British  major  of  artillery  at  New  York  ex- 

1  Journal  or  the  Honse  of  Eepresentatives  of  Massaohnsetta  Bav,  October 
24, 1765,  pp.  131-138.     Hutchinson,  Vol.  IIL,  Appentlis,  pp.  472-474. 
a  Bsnoraft,  History  of  tha  United  States,  Vol.  V.  p.  272. 


■cibyGoogIc 


172        riiEEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVEEY   SECTIONAL: 

claimed,  in  tones  not  unlike  those  now  heard,  "  I  will 
crain  the  stamps  down  their  throats  witli  the  end  of 
iny  sword ! "  ^  The  elatxjiate  answer  of  Massachusetts, 
a  paper  of  historic  grandeur,  drawn  by  Samiiel  Adams, 
was  pronounced  "the  ravings  of  a  parcel  of  wild  en- 
thusisists,"  ^ 

Thus  in  those  flays  spoke  the  partisans  of  the  Stamp 
Act.  But  their  weakness  was  soon  manifest.  In  the 
face  of  an  awakened  conmmnity,  where  discussion  has 
free  scope,  no  men,  though  supported  by  oflice  and 
wealth,  can  long  maintain  injustica  Earth,  water,  Ma- 
ture they  may  subdue ;  hut  Truth  they  cannot  subdue. 
Subtle  and  mighty  against  tdl  efforts  and  devices,  it 
fills  every  region  of  light  with  its  majestic  presence. 
The  Stamp  Act  was  discussed  and  understood.  Its  vio- 
lation of  constitutional  rights  was  exposed.  By  resolu- 
tions of  legislatures  and  of  town  meetings,  by  speeclies 
and  writings,  hy  public  assemblies  and  processions,  the 
country  was  rallied  in  peaceful  phalanx  against  the 
execution  of  the  Act.  To  this  great  object,  ivitliin  the 
bounds  of  Law  and  the  Constitution,  were  bent  all  the 
patriot  enei^es  of  the  land. 

And  here  Boston  took  the  lead.  Her  records  at  this 
time  are  full  of  proud  memorials.  In  formal  instruc- 
tions to  her  representatives,  adopted  unanimously  in 
Town  Meeting  at  Faneuil  HaU,  "having  been  read  sev- 
ei-al  times,  and  put  paragraph  by  paragraph,"  the  fol- 
lowing rule  of  conduct  was  prescribed. 

"We  therefore  think  it  our  mdispeusable  duty,  injustice 
to  giirselves  and  posterity,  as  it  ia  our  undoubted  privilege, 
in  the  most  open  aud  unreserved,  but  decent  and  respectful 

1  Bancroft,  History  of  the  United  Stataa,  Vol.  V.  p.  332. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL    OF   THE   FUGITIVE    SLAVE   ACT.  173 

terms,  to  declare  our  greatest  dissatisfaction  with  this  law : 
and  im  Odnh  it  inoiimbent  upon,  you  hff  no  means  to  Join  in 
any  public  measures  for  countenancing  and  assisting  in  the 
execution  of  the  same,  but  to  use  your  best  endeavors  in  the 
General  Assembly  to  have  the  inherent,  unalienable  rights 
of  the  people  of  this  Province  asserted  and  vindicated,  and 
left  upon  the  public  records,  -that  posterity  ijiay  never  have 
reason  to  charge  the  present  times  with  the  guilt  of  tamely 
giviug  them  away,"  ^ 

Virginia  responded  to  Boston.  Many  of  her  justices 
of  the  peace  surrendered  their  commissions,  rather  than 
aid  in  the  enforcement  of  the  law,  or  he  "  instrumental 
in  the  destruction  of  their  country's  most  essential 
rights  and  liberties."^ 

As  tlie  opposition  deepened,  there  was  a  natural  ten- 
dency to  outbreak  and  violence.  But  this  was  carefully 
restrained.  On  one  occasion,  in  Boston,  it  showed  itself 
in  the  lawlessness  of  a  mob.  But  the  town,  at  a  public 
meeting  in  Faneuil  Hall,  called  ivithout  delay  on  the 
motion  of  the  opponents  of  the  Stamp  Act,  with  James 
Otis  as  chairman,  condemned  the  outrage.  Et^er  in 
hostility  to  the  execution  of  the  Act,  Boston  cherished 
municipal  ordei',  and  constantly  discountenanced  all  tu- 
mult, violence,  and  illegal  proceedings.  Her  equal  devo- 
tion to  these  two  objects  drew  the  praises  and  congrat- 
ulations of  other  to^vns.  In  reply,  March  24,  1766,  to 
an  Address  from  the  inhabitants  of  Plymouth,  her  own 
consciousness  of  duty  done  is  thus  e 


"  If  the  inhabitants  of  this  metropolis  have  biken  the  war- 
rantable atul  legal  measures  to  prevent  that  misfortune,  of  all. 

1  Town  Kecords.MS.,  September  18;  Boston  Gazette,  September 23, 1765 
^  PeiinsylvaDia  Gazette,  October  31,  1765.    Anuaal  Ecgister  for  1765 
p.  [63. 


■cibyGoogIc 


174         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,   SLAVERY  SECTIONAL: 

otliers  the  mo»t  to  he  dreaded,  the  execution  of  the  Stamp  Act,  aoA, 
as  a  necessary  means  of  preventing  it,  have  made  any  spirited 
appHoationS  for  opening  the  custom-houses  and  courts  of  jus- 
tice, — if  at  the  same  time  thei/  liave  bore  their  testimony  against 
outraffeous  tumults  ancl  illegal  proceedings,  and  given  any  ex- 
ample of  the  love  of  peace  and  good  order,  next  to  the  con- 
scioi^uesa  of  having  done  their  duty  is  the  satisfaction  of 
meeting  with  the  approbation  of  any  of  their  fellow-country- 
men." ^ 

Learn  now  from  the  Diary  of  John  Adama  the  results 
of  this  system. 

"The  year  1765  hns  leen  then  est  remiikdlle  ■\  ear  of  my 
life.  That  enormous  eng  lie  falticited  hj  the  Piitish  Par- 
liament, for  batteung  down  all  the  nehts  ani  liberties  of 
America,  —  I  mean  the  Stamp  Act  —  hia  raised  and  spread 
through  the  whole  coni.  neat  a  spirit  that  will  be  recorded 
to  our  honor  with  til  futuie  genet  vtions  In  every  Colony, 
from  Oeorgia  to  New  Hampshiie  inclusively  the  etamp  dis- 
tributors and  inspectois  have  been  compelled  by  the  uncon- 
querable rage  of  the  people  to  renounce  their  offices.  Such 
and  so  universal  has  been  the  resentment  of  the  people,  that 
every  man  who  has  dared  to  speak  in  favor  of  the  stamps, 
or  to  soften  the  detestation  in  which  they  are  held,  how 
great  soever  his  abilities  and  virtues  had  been  esteemed  be- 
fore, or  whatever  his  fortune,  connections,  and  influonco  had 
been,  has  been  seen  to  sink  into  universal  contempt  and  ig- 
nominy." ^ 

The  Stamp  Act  became  a  dead  letter.  At  the  meet- 
ing of  Parliament  numerous  petitions  were  presented, 
calling  for  its  instant  repeal  Franklin,  at  that  time  in 
England,  while  giving  his  famous  testimony  before  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAX  OF  THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  175 

House  of  Commons,  was  asked  -whether  he  thought  the 
people  of  America  would  submit  to  this  Act,  if  "  moder- 
ated." His  brietj  emphatic  response  was  :  "  No,  never, 
unless  compelled  by  force  of  arms."^  Clmtham,  weak 
with  disease,  yet  mighty  in  eloquence,  exclaimed  in 
ever  memorable  words:  "The  gentleman  tells  us,  Amer- 
ica is  obstinate,  America  is  almost  in  open  rebellion. 
Sir,  I  rejoice  that  America  has  resisted.  Three  millions 
of  people,  po  dead  to  all  the  feelings  of  hberty  as  vol- 
untarily to  submit  to  be  slaves,  would  have  been  fit  in- 
struments to  make  slaves  of  the  rest.  ....  The  Amer- 
icans have  been  wronged ;  they  have  been  driven  to 
madness  by  injustice.  ....  Upon  the  whole,  I  will  beg 
leave  to  tell  the  House  what  ia  really  my  opinion.  /( is, 
that  tlie  Stawp  Act  ie  repealed,  ahsohttely,  totally,  and  im- 
mediately." ^  It  was  repealed.  Within  less  than  a  year 
from  its  or^;inal  passage,  denounced  and  discredited, 
it  was  driven  from  the  Statute  Booli,  In  the  charnel- 
house  of  history,  with  unclean  things  of  the  Past,  it  now 
rots.     Thither  the  Slave  Act  must  follow. 

Sir,  regarding  the  Stamp  Act  candidly  and  cautiously, 
free  from  animosities  of  the  time,  it  is  impossible  not  to 
see,  that,  though  gravely  unconstitutional,  it  was  at  most 
an  infringement  of  ciml  liberty  only,  not  of  personal 
hberby.  There  was  an  unjust  tax  of  a  few  pence,  with 
the  chance  of  amercement  by  a  single  judge  without  a 
jury ;  but  by  no  provision  of  this  Act  was  the  personal 
liberty  of  any  man  assailed.  No  freenmn  could  be  seized 
under  it  as  a  slave.  Such  an  Act,  tliough  justly  obnox- 
ious to  every  lover  of  Constitutional  Liberty,  cannot  be 
viewed  with  the  feelings  of  repugnance  enkindled  by  a 


■cibyGoogIc 


176         FREEDOM  NAnONAL,  SLAVEKY   SECrlO:sAL: 

statute  which  assails  the  personal  literty  of  every  man, 
and  under  which  any  freeman  may  be  seized  as  a  slave. 
Sir,  in  placing  the  Stamp  Act  by  the  side  of  the  Slave 
Act,  I  do  injustice  to  that  emanation  of  British  tyr- 
anny. Both  infringe  important  rights:  one,  of  property; 
the  other,  the  vital  right  of  all,  which  is  to  other  rights 
as  soul  to  body,  —  th&  right  of  a  man  to  himself.  Both 
are  condemned ;  but  their  relative  condemnation  must 
be  measured  by  their  relative  characters.  As  Freedom 
is  more  than  property,. as  Man  is  above  the  dollar  that 
he  earns,  as  heaven,  to  wliich  we  all  aspire,  is  higher 
than  earth,  where  every  accumulation  of  wealth  must 
ever  remain,  so  are  the  rights  assailed  by  an  American 
Congress  higher  than  those  once  assailed  by  the  British 
Parliament.  And  just  in  this  degree  must  history  con- 
demn the  Slave  Act  more  than  the  Stamp  Act 

Sir,  I  might  here  stop.  It  is  enoi^h,  in  this  place, 
and  on  this  occasion,  to  show  the  unconstitutionaHty  of 
this  enactment.  Your  duty  commences  at  Once,  All 
l^slation  hostile  to  the  fundamental  law  of  the  land 
should  be  repealed  witliont  delay.  But  the  argument 
is  not  yet  exhausted.  Even  if  this  Act  could  claim 
any  validity  or  apology  under  the  Constitution,  which 
it  cannot,  U  lacks  that  essential  support  in  tJie  Pvilic 
Cojmimce  of  the.  States,  where  it  is  to  le  mf creed,  which 
is  the  life  of  all  law,  and  withovi  which  any  law  must 
become  a  dead  letter. 

The  Senator  from  South  Carolina  (Mr.  Butler)  was 
right,  when,  at  the  beginning  of  the  session,  he  point- 
edly said  that  a  law  which  can  be  enforced  only  by 
the  bayonet  is  no  law.^     Sir,  it  is  idle  to  suppose  that 

1  Speech  on  the  Compromise  Meaanrea,  Deeeraber  IB,  1881:  Congres- 
Eiounl  Globe,  Vol.  SXIV.  p.  »3. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL   OP  THE   FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  177 

an  Aet  of  Congress  becomes  effective  merely  by  com- 
pliance with  the  forma  of  legislation.  Something  more 
ia  necessary.  The  Act  must  be  in  harmooy  with  the 
prevailing  public  sentiment  of  the  community  upon 
which  it  bears.  I  do  riot  mean  that  the  cordial  support 
of  eveiy  man  or  of  eveiy  small  locality  is  necessaiy; 
but  I  do  mean  that  the  public  feehr^s,  the  public  con- 
victions, the  piiblic  conscience,  must  not  be  touched, 
wounded,  lacerated,  by  every  endeavor  to  enforce  it. 
With  all  these  it  must  be  so  far  in  hai-mony,  that,  hke 
the  laws  by  which  property,  hberty,  and  hfe  are  guard- 
ed, it  may  be  administered  by  the  ordinary  process  of 
courts,  without  jeoparding  the  public  peace  or  shock- 
ing good  men.  If  this  be  true  as  a  general  rule,  if  the 
pubhc  support  and  sympathy  be  essential  to  the  Hfe 
of  all  law,  this  is  especially  the  case  in  an  enactment 
which  concerns  the  important  and  sensitive  rights  of 
Personal  Liberty.  In  conformity  with  this  principle, 
the  Legislature  of  Massachusetts,  in  1850,  by  formal 
resolution,  d    1      1      'th    'n     lar     nanin  ty  — 

"We  hold  h    d    y  of  C  ngr    s    o  ^ass  B     h 

laws  only  in.  d  il  h  d  b      h 

lie  Beutiment         h    T  w  su.  h.      w 

be  enforced." 

The  duty  of  consulting  these  sentiments  ^\aa  rei^og 
nizeJ  by  Washington.  While  President  of  the  Unit- 
ed States,  towards  the  close  of  his  administi-ation,  he 
sought  to  recover  a  slave  who  had  fled  to  New  Hamp- 
shu'e.  His  autograph  letter  to  Mr.  Whipple,  the  Col- 
lector at  Portsmouth,  dated  at  Philadelphia,  28th  No- 
vember, 1796,  which  I  now  hold  in  my  hand,  and  which 

1  Resolves  concerning  Slsivary,  Mny  1.  1850:  Acts  and  llfisolves,  1849- 
51,  p.  619. 


■cibyGoogIc 


178  FREEDOM   HATlOflAL,    SLAVERY    SECTIONAL: 

has  never  tefoie  seen  the  light,  after  describing  the 
fugitive,  and  particularly  expressing  the  desii-e  of  "her 
mistress,"  Mrs,  Washington,  for  her  return,  employs  the 
following  decisive  language :  — 

"  I  do  not  mean,  however,  by  this  request,  that  such  vio- 


RIOT,  WHICH  MIGHT  BE  THE  CASK,  IP  SHE  HAS  ADHERENTS,  OB 
EVEN  UNEASY  SENSATIONS  IN  THE  MINDS  OP  WELL-DISPOSED  CIT- 
IZENS. Rather  than  either  of  these  should  happen,  I  would 
forego  her  services  altogether,  —  and  the  example,  also,  which 
is  of  infinite  more  importance. 

"Georoe  Washington." 

Mr.  "Whipple,  in  his  reply,  dated  at  Portsmouth,  De- 
cember 22,  1796,  an  autograph  copy  of  which  I  have, 
recognizes  the  rule  of  Washington. 

"I  will  now,  Sir,  agreeably  to  your  desire,  send  her  to 
Alexandria,  ^  it  be  practicable  vdth&ut  the  consfqueaeea  wkieJi 
you  except,  —  that  of  enxiting  a  riot  or  a  mob,  or  creatine/  un- 
easy  seiiMtions  in  the  minds  of  well-disposed  persons.  The 
first  cannot  be  calculated  beforehand ;  it  will  be  governed 
by  the  popular  opinion  of  the  moment,  or  the  cirournstanoes 
that  may  arise  in  the  transaction.  The  latter  may  be  sought 
into  and  judged  of  by  conversing  with  such  persons,  without 
discovering  the  occasion.  So  far  as  I  have  had  opportu- 
nity, I  perceive  that  different  sentiments  are  entertained  on 
this  subject." 

The  fiigitive  ■was  never  returned,  but  lived  in  free- 
dom to  a  good  old  age,  down  to  a  very  recent  day,  a 
monument  of  the  just  forbearance  of  him  whom  we 
aptly  call  Father  of  his  Country.  True,  he  sought  her 
return.  This  we  must  rt^ret,  and  find  its  apoli^y. 
He  was  at  the  time  a  slaveholder.  Often  expressing 
himself  with  various  degrees  of  force  against  Slavery, 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF   THE  FDGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  179 

and  promising  his  suffrage  for  its  abolition,  he  did  not 
see  this  wrong  as  he  saw  it  at  tlie  close  of  life,  in  the 
illumiuation  of  another  sphere,  Prom  this  act  of  Wash- 
ington, still  swayed  by  the  policy  of  the  world,  I  appeal 
to  Washington  writing  his  will.  From  Washington  on 
earth  I  appeal  to  Washington  in  heaven.  Seek  not  by 
his  name  to  justify  any  such  elibrt.  His  death  is  above 
his  life.  His  last  testament  cancels  his  authority  as  a 
slaveholder.  However  he  may  have  appeared  before 
man,  he  came  into  the  presence  of  .Grod  only  as  Hberator 
of  his  slaves.  Grateful  for  this  example,  I  am  grateful 
also,  that,  while  slaveholder,  and  seekii^  the  return  of  a 
fugitive,  he  has  left  in  permanent  record  a  rule  of  con- 
duct which,  if  adopted  by  his  country,  will  make  Slave- 
Hunting  impossible.  The  chances  of  riot,  or  mob,  or 
"  even  uneasy  sensations  in  the  minds  of  well-disposed 
citizens,"  must  prevent  any  such  pursuit.^ 

Sir,  the  existing  Slave  Act  cannot  be  enforced  with- 
out violating  the  precept  of  Washington.  Wot  merely 
"  uneasy  sensations  of  well-disposed  citizens,"  but  rage, 
tumult,  commotion,  mob,  riot,  violence,  death,  gush  from 
its  fatal  overflowing  fountains :  — 

"  Hoc  fonte  deiivata  olades 

In  patriam  popiilumque  fluxit."  * 

Not  a  case  occurs  without  endangering  the  public  peace. 
Workmen  are  bnitaUy  dragged  from  employments  to 
which  they  are  wedded  by  years  of  successful  labor ; 
husbands  are  ravished  from  wives,  and  parents  from 

1  Tha  poaaibilitj'  of  EOHndiil  and  commotion  was  racogniaed  by  tlie  great 
doctor  of  tbe  Churoh,  St.  Tbomas  Aquinas,  as  proper  to  detannine  hnman 
condnct.  According  ti>  him,  nn  unjust  Inw  is  not  binding  in  conscience, 
niii/orte  primer  tiianihim  tcimdrih-m  vel  turbalioaeia.  —  Suiama  Theolngku, 
Ima  2dEe,  Qutest.  XCVI.  art.  4. 

a  Hor,,  Carm.  m.  vi.  IS,  20. 


■cibyGoogIc 


180  FREEDOM   XATIONAL,    SLAVEEY   SECTIONAL  : 

children.  Everywhere  there  is  disturhance,.— at  "De- 
troit, Buffalo,  Harrisburg,  Syracuse,  Philadelphia,  New- 
York,  Boston.  At  Buffalo  the  fiigitive  was  cruelly 
knocked  by  a  log  of  wood  againat  a  red-hot  stove,  and 
hia  mock  trial  commenced  while  the  hlood  still  oozed 
from  his  wounded  head.  At  Syracuse  he  was  rescued 
by  a  sudden  mob.;  so  also  at  Boston.  At  Harrisburg 
the  fugitive  was  shot ;  at  Christiana  the  Slave-Hunter 
was  shot.  At  New  York  unprecedented  excitement, 
always  with  uncertain  con3ec[uences,  has  attended  eveiy 
easa  Again  at  Boston  a  fugitive,  according  to  received 
report,  was  first  seized  under  base  pretext  that  he  was 
criminal ;  arrested  only  after  deadly  etrv^le ;  guarded 
by  ofiicers  acting  in  violation  of  the  State  laws;  tried 
in  a  court-house  girdled  by  chains,  contrary  to  the  Com- 
mon Law ;  finally  surrendered  to  Slavery  by  -trampling 
on  the  criminal  process  of  the  State,  imder  an  escort 
in  violation  again  of  the  laws  of  the  State,  while  the 
pulpits  trembled,  and  the  whole  people,  not  merely 
"uneasy,"  but  swelling  with  ill-suppressed  indignation, 
though,  for  the  salie  of  order  and  tranquillity,  without 
violence,  witnessed  the  shameful  catastitiphe. 

Oppression  by  an  individual  ja  detestable  ;  but  op- 
pression by  law  is  worse.  Hard  and  inscrutable,  when 
the  law,  to  which  the  citizen  naturally  looks  for  protec- 
tion, becomes  itself  a  standir^  peril.  As  the  sword 
takes  the  place  of  the  shield,  despair  settles  down  like 
a  cloud.  Montesquieu  painted  this  most  cruel  tyranny, 
when  he  said  that  the  man  is  drowned  by  the  very 
plank  on  which  he  thought  to  escape,*  And  Moses  ex- 
poses a  kindred  harshnes.s,  when,  in  commandment  to 
the  Israelites,  he  mysteriously  enjoins,  "  Thou  shalt  not 

>  Grtmm,  Corraspondaiioe,  F^vrjer,  1788,  Tom.  XIV.  pp.  453,  461. 


■cibyGoogIc 


IIEPEAL   OF  THE  FDGiriVE  SLAVE  ACT.  181 

seethe  a  kid  in  its  mother's  milk."  *  Ales !  every  sacri- 
fice under  the  form  of  law  is  only  a  repetition  of  tliis 
forbidden  offence.  The  victim  is  the  innocent  kid,  and 
the  law  is  its  mother's  milk. 

With  every  attempt  to  administer  the  Slave  Act,  it 
constantly  becomes  more  revolting,  particularly  in  its 
inHuence  on  the  agents  it  enlists,  ■  Pitch  cannot  be 
touched  without  defilement,  and  all  who  lend  them- 
selves to  this  work  seem  at  once  and  unconsciously  to 
lose  the  better  part  of  man.  The  spirit  of  the  law  pass- 
es into  them,  as  tlie  devils  entered  the  swine.  Upstart 
commissioners,  mere  mushrooms  of  courts,  vie  and  re- 
vie  with  each  other.  Now  by  indecent  speed,  now  by 
harshness  of  maimer,  now  by  denial  of  evidence,  now  by 
crippling  the  defence,  and  now  by  open,  glarii^  wrong, 
they  malce  the  odious  Act  yet  more  odious.  Clemency, 
grace,  and  justice  die  in  its  presence.  All  this  is  ob- 
served by  the  world.  Kofc  a  case  occurs  which  does  not 
harrow  the  souk  of  good  men,  bringing  tears  of  sym- 
pathy to  the  eyes,  and  those  other  noble  teai's  wliich 
"patriots  shed  o'er  dying  laws." 

Sir,  I  shall  speak  frankly.  If  there  be  an  exception 
to  this  feeling,  it  will  be  found  chiefly  with  a  peculiar 
class.  It  is  a  sorry  fact,  that  the  "  mercantile  interest," 
in  unpardonable  seliishness,  twice  in  EngKsh  history, 
frowned  upon  endeavors  to  suppress  the  atrocity  of  Al- 
gerine  Slavery,  that  it  sought  to  baffle  Wilberforce's 
great  effort  for  the  abolition  of  the  African  slave-trade, 
and  that,  by  a  sordid  compromise,  at  the  formation  of 
our  Constitution,  it  exempted  the  same  detested.  Heaven- 
defying  traffic  from  American  judgment  And  now  rep- 
resentatives of  this  "interest,"  foigetful  that  Commerce 
1  Deuteronomy,  siv.  21. 


;db,Googlc 


182  FKEEDOM    SATIOXALj    SLAVERY    SECTIONAL; 

is  bom  of  Freedom,  join  in  bunting  the  Slave.  But 
the  great  heart  of  the  people  recoils  from  this  enact- 
iflent.  It  palpitates  for  the  fugitive,  and  rejoices  in  his 
escape.  Sir,  I  am  telling  you  facts.  The  literature  of 
the  age  is  all  on  his  side.  Songs,  more  potent  than 
laws,  are  for  him.  Poets,  with  voices  of  melody,  sing  for 
Freedom.  Who  could  time  for  Slavery  ?  They  who 
make  the  permanent  opinion  of  the  country,  who  mould 
our  youth,  whose  words,  dropped  into  the  soul,  are  the 
germs  of  character,  supplicate  for  the  Slave.  And  now. 
Sir,  bcliold  a  new  and  heavenly  ally.  A  woman,  in- 
spired by  Christian  genius,  entere  the  Mats,  hke  another 
Joan  of  Arc,  and  with  marvellous  power  sweeps  the 
popular  heart.  Now  melting  to  tears,  and  now  inspir- 
ing to  rage,  her  work  everywhere  touches  the  con- 
science, and  makes  the  Slave-Hunter  more  hateful.  In 
a  brief  period,  nearly  one  hundred  thousand  copies  of 
"  Uncle  Tom's  Cabin "  have  been  already  circulated.* 
But  this  extraordinary  and  sudden  success,  surpassing 
all  other  instances  in  the  records  of  literature,  cannot 
be  regarded  as  but  the  triumph  of  genius.  Better  far, 
it  is  the  testimony  of  the  people,  by  an  unprecedented 
act,  against  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill. 

These  thirds  I  dwell  upon  as  incentives  and  tokens 
of  an  existing  public  sentiment,  rendering  this  Act  prac- 
tically inoperative,  except  as  a  tremendous  engine  of 
horror.  Sir,  the  sentiment  is  just  Even  in  the  lands 
of  Slavery,  the  slave-trader  is  loathed  as  an  ignoble  char- 
acter, from  whom  the  countenance  is  turned  away ;  and 
can  the  Slave-Hunter  be  more  regarded,  while  pursuing 
his  prey  in  a  land  of  Freedom  ?     In  early  Europe,  in 

1  This  was  the  number  at  the  delivery  of  this  speech.  But  tho  circula- 
tion lias  gone  on  indefinitely. 


;db,Googlc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  183 

barbarous  days,  whQe  Slavery  prevailed,  a  Hunting  Mas- 
ter —  nachjagcnder  Herr,  as  the  Germans  called  him  — 
■was  held  in  aversion.  Nor  was  this  all.  The  fugitive 
was  welcomed  in  the  cities,  and  protected  against  pur- 
suit. Sometimes  vengeance  awaited  the  Hiinter.  Down 
to  this  day,  at  Eevel,  now  a  Russian  city,  a  sword  is 
proudly  preserved  with  which  a  Himting  Baron  was 
beheaded,  who,  in  violation  of  the  municipal  rights  of 
the  place,  seized  a  fugitive  slave.  Hostile  to  this  Act 
as  our  public  sentiment  may  be,  it  exhibits  no  similar 
tropliy.  The  State  laws  of  Massachusetts  have  been 
violated  in  the  seizure  of  a  fugitive  slave ;  but  no  sword, 
like  tlmt  of  Kevel,  now  hangs  at  Boston. 

I  have  said.  Sir,  that  this  sentiment  is  just.  And  is 
it  not  ?  Every  escape  from  Slavery  necessarily  and  in- 
stinctively awalcens  the  regard  of  all  who  love  Freedom. 
The  endeavor,  though  unsuccessful,  reveals  courage, 
manhood,  character.  No  story  is  read  with  gi'eater  in- 
terest than  tliat  of  our  own  Lafayette,  when,  aided  by  a 
gallant  South  Carolinian,  in  defiance  of  despotic  Aus- 
ti'ian  ordinances,  kindred  to  our  Slave  Act,  he  strove 
to  escape  from  the  bondage  of  Olmutz.  Literature 
pauses  witlr  exultation  over  the  atru^les  of  Cervantes, 
the  great  Spaniard,  while  a  slave  in  Algiers,  to  regam 
the  liberty  for  which  he  declared  to  lu'j  companions 
"  we  ought  to  risk  Hfe  itself.  Slavery  being  the  greatest 
evil  that  can  fall  to  the  lot  of  man.'  ^  Science,  m  all 
her  manifold  triumphs,  throbs  with  pride  and  delight, 
that  Arago,  astronomer  and  pliilosopher,  —  devoted  re- 
publican also,  —  was  rescued  from  barbarous  Slavery  to 
become  one  of  her  greatest  sons,  Religion  rejoices  se- 
renely, with  joy  unspeakable,  in  the  final  escape  of  Vin- 


■cibyGooglc 


184:         FKEEDOM   NATIONAL,   SLAVERY  SECTIOSAL ; 

cent  de  Paul.  In  the  pu"bliG  sq^uare  of  Tmus,  exposed 
to  the  inspection  of  trafRckera  in  human  flesh,  tliis  U- 
lustrions  Frenchman  was  subjected  to  eveiy  vilenesa  of 
treatment,  compelled,  like  a  horse,  to  open  his  month, 
to  show  Ms  teeth,  to  trot,  to  run,  to  exhibit  his  strength 
in  lifting  burdens,  and  then,  like  a  horse,  legally  sold 
in  market  overt.  Passii^  from  master  to  master,  after 
protracted  servitude,  he  achieved  his  freedom,  and,  re- 
gaining France,  commenced  that  I'csplendent  career  of 
charity  by  which  he  is  placed  among  the  great  names 
of  ChristendonL  Princes  and  orators  have  lavished 
panegyric  upon  this  fugitive  slave,  and,  in  homage  to 
his  extraordinary  virtues,  the  Catholic  Church  has  in- 
troduced htm  into  the  company  of  Saints. 

Less  by  genius  or  eminent  service  than  by  suffering 
are  the  fugitive  slaves  of  our  country  now  commended. 
For  them  every  sentiment  of  humanity  is  aroused. 

"  Who  noiUd  refrain, 
Thit  had  I  heirt  to  love  and  in  that  heirt 
Con  age  to  ranke  h    love  known  f 

Eude  and  ignonnt  tlie>  mav  be  1  ut  m  tl  en  \  eiv 
efforts  for  Freeloin  they  cUmi  Imliel  with  ill  thit 
is  noble  in  the  Past  Romance  has  no  stori'^s  of  more 
thrilling  inteiest  CUssictI  anti^mty  h'is  pieser\ed  no 
examples  of  ad^  enture  ind  trial  moie  worthy  of  lenown 
They  are  amoi^  the  herres  of  oui  a_e  Among  them 
are  those  whose  names  wilt  bp  tie'isuipd  in  tlip  inrnls 
of  their  race.  By  elo ^uent  i  oice  they  have  done  much 
to  make  their  wrongs  known  in  1  to  secme  the  le^i  ect 
of  the  world.  Histoiy  wiU  soon  lend  her  a\enginj,  i>en 
Proscribed  by  you  during  life,  they  will  proscribe  you 
throi^h  all  time.  Sir,  already  judgment  is  beginning. 
A  righteous  public  sentiment  palsies  your  enactment 


■cibyGoogIc 


"liEPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVR  ACT.  1^5 

And  now,  Sir,  let  xis  review  tlie  field  over  -vvhicli  we 
have  passed  We  have  seen  that  any  eompromiae, 
finally  closing  the  discussion  of  Slavery  under  the  Con- 
stitution, is  tyi-annical,  absurd,  and  impotent ;  that,  as 
Slavery  can  exist  only  by  virtue  of  positive  la  and  as 
it  has  no  such  positive  support  in  the  Coi  stit  t  on  it 
cannot  exist  within  the  national  juriadictio:  tl  at  the 
Constitution  nowhere  recognizes  property  in  iii  and 
that,  according  to  its  true  interpretation,  Fieelon  anl 
not  Slavery  is  national,  while  Slaveiy  and  not  Fieedom 
is  sectional;  that  in  this  spirit  the  N'ational  Govern- 
ment was  first  organized  under  Washington,  himself 
an  Abohtionist,  surrounded  hy  AboHtionists,  wliile  the 
whole  country,  by  its  Church,  its  Colleges,  its  Litera- 
tuie,  and  all  its  best  voices,  was  united  against  Slavery, 
and  the  national  flag  at  that  time  nowhere  within  the 
National  Territory  covered  a  single  slave ;  still  further, 
that  the  National  Government  is  a  Government  of  del- 
egated powers,  and,  as  among  tliese  there  is  no  power  to 
support  Slavery,  this  institution  cannot  be  national,  nor 
can  Congress  in  any  way  legislate  in  its  behalf;  and, 
finally,  that  the  establishment  of  this  principle  is  the 
true  way  of  peace  and  safety  for  the  Eepublic.  Consid- 
ering next  the  provision  for  the  surrender  of  fugitives 
from  service,  we  have  seen  that  it  was  not  one  of  the 
original  compromises  of  the  Constitution ;  that  it  was 
introduced  tardily  and  with  hesitation,  and  adopted  with 
little  discussion,  while  then  and  for  a  long  period  there- 
after it  was  regarded  with  comparative  indilference ; 
that  the  recent  Slave  Act,  though  many  times  unconsti- 
tutional, is  especially  so  on  two  grounds, : — Jirst,  as  a 
usurpation  by  Congress  of  powers  not  granted  by  the 
Constitution,  and  an  Infraction  of  rights  secured  to  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


186  FKEEDOM    NATIONAL,    SLAVERY    SECTIONAL; 

States,  and,  secondly,  as  the  denial  of  Trial  by  Jury,  in  a 
question  of  Personal  Liberty  and  a  snit  at  Common  Law ; 
that  its  glaring  unconstitutionality  finds  a  prototype  in 
the  British  Stamp  Act,  which  our  fathers  refused  to 
obey  as  iniconstitutional  on  two  parallel  grounds,  — first, 
because  it  was  a  usurpation  by  Parliament  of  powers 
not  belonging  to  it  under  the  British  Constitution,  and 
an  infraction  of  rights  belonging  to  the  Colonies,  and, 
secondly,  because  it  was  the  denial  of  Trial  by  Jury  in 
certain  cases  of  property;  that,  as  Liberty  is  far  above 
property,  so  is  the  outrage  pei-petrated  by  the  American 
Congi-ess  far  above  that  perpetrated  by  tlie  British  Par- 
liament; and,  finally,  that  the  Slave  Act  has  not  that 
support,  in  the  public  sentunent  of  the  States  where  it 
is  to  be  executed,  which  is  the  life  of  aU  law,  and  which 
prudence  and  the  precept  of  Wasliington  require. 

Sir,  thus  far  I  have  arrayed  the  objections  to  this  Act, 
and  the  false  interpretations  out  of  which  it  has  sprung. 
But  I  am  asked  what  I  offer  as  a  substitute  for  the  le- 
gislation which  I  denounce.  Freely  I  answer.  It  is 
to  be  found  in  a  correct  appreciation  of  tlie  provision 
of  the  Constitution  under  which  this  discussion  occurs. 
Look  at  it  in  the  double  light  of  Reason  and  of  Freedom, 
and  we  cannot  mistake  the  exact  extent  of  its  require- 
ments.    Here  is  the  provis  on   — - 

"  No  person  held  to  ser  ^ce  or  lab  o  e  St.  te       d  r 

the  laws  thereof,  escaping  nto  a  otl  e  si  11  consequen  e 
of  any  law  or  regulation  tl  ere  n  be  diacl  i^d  fro  b  1 
aerviee  or, labor,  but  shall  be  delve  ed  p  o  H  m  ot  the 
party  to  whom  such  servioe  or  labor  may  be  due." 

From  the  very  language  employed,  it  is  obvious  that 
this  is  merely  a  conipact  between  the  States,  with  a^'o- 


■cibyGooglc 


EEPBAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  187 

hilHion  on  the  States,  con/erring  no  fou>cr  on  the  Natwn. 
In  its  natural  signification  it  ia  a  compact.  According 
to  examples  o£  other  countiies,  and  principles  of  juris- 
pradeuce,  it  is  a  compact  An.'angements  for  extradi- 
tion of  fugitives  have  been  customarily  compacts.  Ex- 
cept under  express  obligations  of  treaty,  no  nation  is 
bound  to  surrender  fv^tives.  Especially  has  this  been 
the  case  with  fugitives  for  Freedom,  In  mediteval 
Europe  cities  refused  to  recognize  this  ohligation  in  fa- 
vor of  persons  even  under  the  same  National  Govern- 
ment. In  1531,  -while  the  Netherlands  and  Spain  were 
united  under  Charl&s  the  Fifth,  the  Supreme  CouneiL  of 
Meclilm  rejected  an  application  from  Spain  for  the  sur- 
render of  a  fugitive  slave.  By  express  compact  alone 
could  this  he  secured.  But  the  provision  of  the  Consti- 
tution was  borrowed  from  the  Ordinance  of  the  Noith- 
westem  Territory,^  which  is  expressly  declared  to  be  a 
compact ;  and  this  Ordinance,  finally-  drawn  by  Nathan 
Dane,  was  itself  borrowed,  in  distinctive  feature,  from  the 
early  institutions  of  Massachusetts,  among  which,  as  far 
hack  as  1643,  was  a  compact  of  like  nature  with  other 
New  England  States.^    Thus  this  provision  is  a  compact 

1  "  Aht.  VI.  There  shall  be  neither  sliiveiy  nor  iiivoluntaiy  eervltude  in 
the  SKiil  Territory,  otherwise  than  In  tlie  punisliinent  of  crimes  whereof  the 
party  shiil!  have  been  duly  ooiivioted :  Provided  always,  that  any  person 
eaoaping  into  the  same,  from  wliom  labor  or  service  is  lawfully  elaimecl  in 
any  one  of  tha  original  States,  suoli  fugitive  may  be  lawfully  reclaimed, 
and  conveyed  to  the  person  elainiiiig  his  or  her  labor  or  service  as  nfore- 
B(dd."  —  Ordinattee  for  the  Government  of  the  Territory  iVwUioesi  of  the 
Eiver  Ohio,  July  IS,  1787:  Journals  of  Congress,  Vol.  XII.  pp.  92,  93. 

'   3  "8 It  Is  also  agreed,  that  tf  any  servant  run  away  from  hia 

master  into  any  of  the  conf^lerate  jurisdictions,  that  in  such  case  (upon 
certificate  from  one  magistrate  in  the  jurisdiction  out  of  which  tUe  said 
servant  fled,  or  upon  other  due  proof)  the  said  servant  shall  be  either  de- 
livered to  his  master  or  any  other  that  pursues  and  brings  such  certilicata 
and  proof."  —  Ariidetof  Omfederatiim  betmeen  the  PlinUatUms,  eto..  May  29 
laS:  Hubbard's  History  of  New  England,  p.  473, 


■cibyGoogIc 


188         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVERY  SECTIOKAI.: 

in  langimgo,  in  nature,  in  its  whole  Iiistory ;  as  wc  have 
already  seen,  it  is  a  compact  according  to  the  intentions 
of  our  fathers  and  the  genius  of  our  institutions. 

As  a  compact,  its  execution  depends  ahsolutely  up- 
on the  States,  without  any  intervention  of  the  Nation. 
Eack  State,  in  tlie  exercise  of  its  own  judgment,  will  deter- 
mine fm'  itself  the  precise  extent  of  oUigaiion  assvmed. 
As  a  compact  in  derogation  of  Freedom,  it  must  be 
constnxed  strictly  in  every  respect,  leaning  always  in 
favor  of  Freedom,  and  shunning  any  meaning,  not  clearly 
necessary,  which  takes  away  important  personal  rights ; 
mindfid  that  the  parties  to  whom  it  is  appKeable  are 
regarded  as  "  persons,"  of  course  with  all  the  rights  of 
"  persons,"  imder  the  Constitution ;  especially  mindful 
of  the  vigorous  maxim  of  the  Common  Law,  early  an- 
nounced hy  Fortescue,  that  "  he  is  to  be  adjudged  im- 
pious and  cruel  who  does  not  favor  Liberty  "  ^ ;  and  also 

1  De  Lsiudibns  Legura  AnglisB,  Cnp.  XLII.;  Coke  upon  Littleton,  IZib. 
Graiivilie  Shtivp,  in  the  remnrkalile  testimony  alresuiy  cited  {ante,  p.  108), 
quotes  Fortescne  thus;  "  For  in  behnlf  of  Liberty  hnmnn  natnrB  always 
implores :  beonuse  Slaves-y  ia  introduced  by  mon,  and  for  vice  ;  but  Liberig  is 
implnnted  6y  God  in  the  yeiy  nature  of  mmm;  wlisraforB,  when  stolen  by 
man,  it  ahrays  earnestly  longs  to  return;  as  does  everything  which  is  de- 
privetl  of  nalimU  liberty.  Foe  which  reason  the  man  who  does  not  fator 
Liberty  is  to  be  m^udged  iB^iHiia  and  cmel  The  laws  of  England  acknowl- 
edging these  principles  give  faTor  to  L^erty  in  eocTf  eon."  After  tliis  es- 
tmct  from  Forteacue,  we  are  reminded  that  "  Slnvflry  is  properly  deelared 
by  one  of  our  oldest  English  Bnthorities  in  law,  Fleta,  to  be  coatrary  to 
Nature  (Fleta,  2d  edit.  p.  1),  which  expreesion  of  Fletn  Is  really  a  maxim  of 
the  Civil  or  Roman  Law";  and  then  Sharp  predicts  the  time  when  "our 
deluded  statesmen,  lawyers,  commercial  politicians,  and  phmters  shall  he 
compelled  to  nnderatond  that  a  moifl  forcible  expression  of  illegality  and 
iziiquity  could  not  have  been  used  than  that  by  which  Slavery  is  defined  In 
the  Roman  code,  as  well  a»  by  oni- English  Fleta,  i.  e.  that  it  is  contra  nalarmi, 
against  Nature;  for,  consequently,  it  must  be  utterly  illflgal,  a  crime  which 
by  the  first  foundation  of  English  law  is  justly  deemed  both  impioHi  and 
cruel"  I  and  he  adds,  "Thaseverity  of  these  expressions  cannot  be  restrained 
without  in.iHstIca  to  the  high  nutliorUles  on  which  this  argument  is  founded." 
(Letter  totheMaij-land  Society  for  Promodng  the  Abolition  of  Slavery,  etc. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPKAL    OF    THE    FUGITIVE    SLAVE   ACT.  189 

completely  adopting,  in  letter  and  spirit,  as  becomes 
a  just  people,  the  mle  of  the  great  Commentator,  that 
"  the  law  is  always  ready  to  catch  at  anything  in  favor 
of  Liberty."  ^  With  tliis  key  the  true  interpretation  is 
natural  and  easy. 

Briefly,  tlie  States  are  prohibited  from  any  "  law  or 
regulation"  by  whicli  any  "person"  escaped  from  "ser- 
vice or  labor"  may  be  tliscbarged  therefrom,  and  on 
establishment  of  the  claim  to  such  "  service  or  labor " 
he  is  to  be  "  delivered  up."  But  the  mode  by  wliicli  the 
claim  shall  be  tried  and  determined  is  not  specified. 
All  this  is  obviously  within  the  control  of  each  State. 
It  may  be  by  virtue  of  express  legislation;  in  which 
event,  any  Legislature,  justly  careful  of  Personal  Liberty, 
would  surround  the  fugitive  with  eveiy  sliield  of  Law 
and  Constitution.  But  here  a  fact  pregnant  with  Fi'ee- 
dom  must  be  studiously  observed.  The  name  Slave  — 
that  Ktany  of  wrong  and  woe  —  does  not  appear  in  the 
clause.  Here  is  no  unambiguous  phrase,  incapable  of  a 
double  sense,  —  no  "positive"  language,  applicable  only 
to  slaves,  and  excluduig  all  other  classes,  —  no  word  of 
that  absolute  certainty  in  every  particular  which  forbids 
any  interpretation  except  that  of  Slavery,  and  makes  it 
impossible  "  to  catch  at  anything  in  favor  of  Liberty." 
Nothing  of  this  kind  is  here.  But,  ijassing  from  this, — 
"  impiously  and  cruelly  "  renouncing  for  the  moment  all 
leanings  for  Freedom,  —  refusii^  "  to  catch  at  anything 

pp.  6-S.)  Tilts  testimony  of  the  great  English  Abolitionist  ia  reinforced,  es- 
pecially with  regard  to  ftigitive  slaves,  when  we  consider  its  pablictLtion  in 
1TB3  hy  the  Abolition  Society  of  Hnryland,  with  the  prefhtory  observation, 
that,  "  in  the  ense  of  slaTea  escaping  from  their  masters,  the  friends  of  uni- 
versal liberty  ere  often  embarrassad  in  their  condnct  by  a  conflict  between 
Hieir  principles  and  tbe  ebBgaliom  iMposed  byuraaise  and  perhaps  tatanalUu- 
tional  luwi." 
I  Blachstone,  Commentaries,  Vol  II.  p.  04. 


;db,Googlc 


190  FREEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVEKY  SECTIOXAL: 

in  favor  of  Liberty," — abandouing  the  cbeiished  idea 
of  the  Fatliers,  that  it  was  "  wrong  to  admit  in  the  Con- 
stitution the  idea  that  there  could  be  property  in  men," 
—  and,  in  the  face  of  these  commanding  principles,  as- 
suming two  things, — first,  that,  in  the  evasive  language 
of  tliis  clause,  the  Convention,  whatever  may  have  been 
the  aim  of  individual  members,  really  intended  fugitive 
slaves,  which  is  sometimes  questioned,  and,  secondly, 
that,  if  they  so  intended,  the  language  employed  can 
be  judicially  r^rded  as  justly  applicable  to  fugitive 
slaves,  which  is  often  and  earnestly  denied,  —  then  the 
whole  proceeding,  without  any  express  legislation,  may 
be  left  to  ancient  and  authentic  forms  of  the  Common 
Law,  familiar  to  the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  and 
ample  for  the  occasion.  If  the  fugitive  be  seized  with- 
out process,  he  wiU  be  entitled  at  once  to  his  writ 
de  Homine  Re^Ugiando,  while  the  master,  resorting  to 
ss,  may  lind  his  remedy  in  the  writ  de  Naiveo 
lo,  each  requiring  trial  by  jury.  If,  from  ig- 
norance or  lack  of  employment,  these  processes  have 
slumbered  in  our  country,  still  they  belong  to  the  great 
arsenal  of  the  Common  Law,  and  continue,  like  other  an- 
cient writs,  tanquam  gladius  in  vagina,  ready  to  be  em- 
ployed at  the  first  necessity.  They  belong  to  the  safe- 
guards of  the  citizen.  But  in  any  event,  and  in  either 
alternative,  the  proceeding  would  be  by  "  suit  at  Common 
Law,"  with  Trial  by  Jury ;  and  it  would  be  the  solemn 
duty  of  the  court,  according  to  aU  the  forms  and  proper 
delays  of  the  Common  Law,  to  try  the  case  on  the  evi- 
dence, strictly  to  apply  aU  protecting  rules  of  evidence, 
and  especially  to  requite  stringent  proof,  by  comije- 
tent  witnesses  under  cross-examination,  that  the  person 
claimed  was  lield  to  service,  ,that  liis  6 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.      191 

to  the  claimant,  that  he  had  escaped  from  the  State  M'here 
such  service  was  due,  and  also  proof  of  the  laws  of  the 
State  under  which  he  was  held.  Still  further,  to  the 
Courts  of  eacJt  State  must  belo]tg  th&  determination  of  the 
question,  to  what  class  of  persons,  according  to  jmt  rules 
of  interpreiation,  the  phrase  "person  held  to  sercice  or 
labor"  is  strictly  applicable. 

Such  is  this  much  debated  provision.  The  Slave 
States,  at  the  formation  of  the  Constitution,  did  not 
propose,  as  in  cases  of  KaturaKzation  and  Bankruptcy, 
to  empower  the  National  Government  to  estahli^  an 
uniform  rule  for  tlie  rendition  of  fugitives  from  service, 
throughout  the  United  States;  they  did  not  ask  the  Na- 
tional Government  to  charge  itself  in  any  way  with  this 
service ;  they  did  not  venture  to  oifend  the  country,  and 
particularly  the  Northern  States,  hy  any  such  assertion 
of  hateful  pretension.  They  were  content,  under  the 
sanctions  of  compact,  in  leaving  it  to  the  pubhc  senti- 
ment of  the  States.     There,  I  insist,  it  must  n 


Mr.  President,  I  have  occupied  much  time ;  but  the 
great  subject  still  stretches  before  us.  One  other  point 
yet  remains,  which  I  must  not  leave  untouched,  and 
which  justly  belongs  to  the  close.  The  Slave  Act  vio- 
lates the  Constitution,  and  shocks  the  Public  Conscience. 
With  modesty,  and  yet  with  firmness,  let  me  add.  Sir,  it 
offends  against  the  Divine  Law.  No  such  enactment 
is  entitled  to  support  As  the  throiie  of  God  is  above 
every  earthly  throne,  so  are  his  laws  and  statutes  above 
all  the  laws  and  statutes  of  man.  To  question  these  is 
to  question  God  himself.  But  to  assume  that  human 
laws  are  beyond  question  is  to  claim  for  their  fallible 
authors  infallibihty.     To  assume  that,  they  are  { 


■cibyGoogIc 


192  rKEEDOM    NATIONAL,    SLAVERY    SECTIOKAL 1 

in  conformity  with  the  laws  of  God  is  presumptuously 
and  impioiisly  to  exalt  man  even  to  equaUty  with  God. 
Cleaily,  human  laws  are  not  always  in  such  conformity ; 
nor  can  they  ever  he  heyond  question  from  ea^h  indi- 
vidual. Where  the  conflict  is  open,  as  if  Cor^ress 
should  command  the  perpetration  of  murder,  the  office 
of  conscience  as  final  arbiter  is  undisputed.  But  in 
every  conflict  the  same  queenly  office  is  liers.  By  no 
earthly  power  can  she  be  dethroned.  Eaoh  person,  after 
anxious  examination,  without  haste,  without  passion, 
solemnly  for  himself  must  decide  this  great  controversy. 
Any  other  rule  attributes  infaUihility  to  human  laws, 
places  them  heyond  question,  and  degrades  all  men  to 
an  unthinliing,  passive  obedience. 

According  to  St.  Augustine,  an  unjust  law  does  not 
appear  to  be  a  law :  Lex  esse  non  videtur  qucs  justa  non 
fuerit}  And  the  great  Fathers  of  the  Church,  while  adopt- 
ing these  words,  declare  openly  that  unjust  laws  are  not 
binding.  Sometimes  they  are  called  "  iniquity,"  and  not 
law;  sometimes  "violences,"  and  not  lawa^  And  here 
again  the  conscience  of  each  person  is  final  arbiter. 
But  this  lofty  principle  is  not  coniined  to  tlie  Church. 
Earlier  than  the  Chiirch,  a  sublime  Heathen  announced 
the  same  truth.  After  assailing  ind^iantly  tliat  com- 
pletest  folly  which  would  find  the  rule  of  justice  in 
human  institutions  and  laws,  and  then  asking  if  the 
laws  of  tyrants  are  just  simply  beca\ise  laws,  Cicero 

1  Da  Libaro  Arliitrio,  Lib.  I.  e.  6.  See  Thomas  Aqolnna,  Summa  The&- 
logica,  Ima  2dtB,  Qufflst.  XCVI.  Bit.  4;  also,  Balmez,  Protaslantism  tmd 
Catholicity  compared  in  thek  Effects  on  the  Civil izstion  of  Europe,  Ch.  53. 

2  Magis  iwquilai  jimni  lex,  mngit  riu&nd'ffi  quam  lege).  ThomKB  Aquinas, 
Snmma  Thaol.,  Iraa  2diH,  Quiest.  XC.  art.  1,  SCVL  art.  4.  The  supreme 
duty  to  Ood  ia  recogni;ied  in  a  text  of  St.  Basii,  Oiediendion  etl  in  fuifral 
mandnium  Dei  non  in^teditiir,  quoted  by  Filmer,  Patriarcha,  Cii.  UI.  §  8. 


■cibyGoogIc 


KEl'EAL    OF   THE   FUGITIVE    SLAVE   ACT.  193 

declares,  that,  if  edicts  of  popular  assemUiea,  decrees 
of  princes,  and  decisions  of  judges  constitute  right, 
then  there  may  be  a  right  to  rob,  a  right  to  commit 
adultery,  a  right  to  set  up  forged  -wills;  whereas  be 
does  not  hesitate  to  say  that  pernicious  and  pestilent 
statutes  can  be  no  more  entitled  to  the  name  of  law 
than  robber  codes  ;  and  he  concludes,  in  words  as 
strong  as  those  of  Sfc  Augustine,  that  an  unjust  law 
is  null'  A  master  of  philosophy  in  early  Europe,  of 
intellectual  renown,  the  elocjuent  Abelard,  in  Latin 
verses  addressed  to  his  son,  clearly  expresses  the  uni- 
versal injunction: — 

"  Juasa  potestatis  terrene  disontienda: 

Coelesti^  tib!  mas.  perficiendit  .scIhs. 
SiquisdivlnisjubeHtcontTflviajassis, 

Te  eoutm  Dominum  paotio  nulla  trahat."  * 

The  mandates  of  an  earthly  power  are  to  be  discussed ; 
those  of  Heaven  must  at  once  be  performed ;  nor  should 

1  Db  Legibna,  Ltb.  I.  capp.  16, 16 ;  Lib.  II.  oapp.  B,  B.    The  coiiclHsion 
oppesra  In  tha  dialogne  between  Oicem  iu:d  hia  brother  Qiiintns. 

"  Mako.    Ei^  est  lei  justorum  injnstornmqne  diatlnotio,  ad  illam  nnU- 
qnissimametreram  omnium  prinoipemespreaaanaturHm 

"  QuisT.    PriBclnre  intelUgo:  wo  vei'o  jnni  alinm  ease  nliam  legem  puto 
non  modo  hnbendam,  aed  ne  nppellHndBm  quidem." 

'  Among  moderna,  the  Abb^  de  Mably,  in  an  elaborate  discussion,  adopts 
the  conclnalon  of.Cloero,  us  well  »s  his  treatment  of  it  by  dinlogne,  making 
his  interloentor,  I,ord  Stanhope,  ask,  ■' WhKtfother  remedy  onn  be  ap]>lied  to 
this  evil  than  diaobedleiioe?  "  and  repreaenting  lilm  as  "  pnlveriziiig  without 
difficnltv  the  miserable  commonplaces  hi  opposition."  —  Dta  Divils  el  del 
Devoirada  Ciloym,  Leflie  IV.!  (Envres  (Paris,  1797),  Tom.  XI.  pp.  249, 
SGI. 


:  of  the  (Edtim  Tyram 

Ittt!- 

M^Q!  ^  toAto, 

.!  ^fis,  DiiS;  TJjpdocH.  —V.  845 

Great  in  the 

te  laws  is  God,  and  grows  not  ol 

Versus  ad  Astrolabiun 

1  Filinm:  Opera  (ed.  Cousin), ' 

;db,Googlc 


194         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVEEY  SECTIONAL: 

we  suffer  ourselves  to  be  drawn  ty  any  compact  into 
opposition  to  God.  Such  ia  the  rule  of  morals.  Such, 
also,  by  the  lips  of  judges  and  sages,  is  the  proud  deela^ 
ration  of  Englisli  law,  whence  our  own  ia  derived.  In 
this  conviction,  patriots  have  braved  unjust  commands, 
and  martyrs  have  died. 

And  now.  Sir,  the  rule  is  commended  to  us.  The 
good  citizen,  who  sees  before  him  the  shiverii^  fugi- 
tive, guilty  of  no  crime,  pursued,  hunted  down  like  a 
beast,  while  praying  for  Christian  help  and  dehveranee, 
and  then  reads  the  requirements  of  this  Act,  is  fiUed 
with  horror.  Here  is  a  despotic  mandate  "to  aid  and 
assist  in  the  prompt  and  efficient  execution  of  this  law."  ^ 
Again  let  me  speak  frankly.  Not  rashly  would  I  set  my- 
self against  any  requirement  of  law.  This  grave  respon- 
sibility I  would  not  hghtly  assume.  But  here  the  path 
of  duty  is  clear.  By  the  Supreme  Law,  which  com- 
mands me  to  do  no  injustice,  hy  the  comprehensive 
Christian  law  of  Brotherhood,  hy  the  Constitution,  which 
I  have  sworn  to  suppm-t,  I  AM  BOUND  to  disobey  this 
ACT.  Never,  in  any  capacity,  can  I  render  voluntary 
aid  in  its  execution.  Pains  and  penalties  I  will  endure, 
but  this  great  wrong  I  will  not  do.  "  Where  I  cannot, 
obey  actively,  there  I  am  willing  to  lie  down  and  to  suf- 
fer what  they  shall  do  unto  me  " :  such  was  the  exclama- 
tion of  him  to  whom  we  are  indebted  for  the  "  Pi^rim's 
Progress,"  while  in  prison  for  disobedience  to  an  eartldy 
statute.^    Better  suffer  injustice  than  do  it.    Better  vic- 

'  Fugitive  Slaye  Act,  Septerabei- 18, 1850,  Soo.  6. 

»  Relation  of  the  Imprisonment  of  Mr.  Jolin  Bnnyan,  written  hy  Himaeif: 
Works  (GlflBgow,  1853),  Vol.  I.  pp.  69,  80.  Balmez,  the  Spanish  divine, 
U'tiose  vindication  of  the  earlj'  CaUiolrc  Church  is  a  remarkable  monument, 
declares,  aller  cnrefnl  disctiBsion, "  that  the  riithCs  of  the  civil  power  are  lim- 
ited, tliat  there  are  things  beyond  its  province, — oaeeein  which  a  man  maj 


;db,Googlc 


REPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE   BLiVE  ACT.  195 

tim  than  instrument  of  ^vrong.  Better  even  the  poor 
slave  returned  to  bondage  than  the  wretched  Commia- 
sioner. 

There  is.  Sir,  an  incident  of  history  which  si^gests  a 
pai'allel,  and  affords  a  lesson  of  iidelity.  Under  the  tri- 
umphant exertions  of  that  Apostolic  Jesuit,  St.  Francis 
Xavier,  lai^e  numbers  of  Japanese,  amounting  to  as 
many  as  two  hundred  thousand,  —  among  them  princes, 
generals,  and  the  flower  of  the  nobOity, — were  converted 
to  Christianity.  Afterwards,  amidst  the  frenzy  of  civil 
war,  religious  persecution  arose,  and  the  penalty  of  death 
was  denounced  against  all  who  refused  to  trample  upon 
the  effigy  of  the  Eedeemer.     This  was  the  Pagan  law  of 

say,  and  ouglit  to  say,  7  viill  Btrf  obey."  (ProtestantiBm  and  Catholicity 
Coinparad,  Ch.  64.)  Deyioas  to  avoid  the  enforcement  of  tiiyust  laws 
iiluatrata  this  riglil«OTis  disobedience,  —  as  where  English  Juries,  before 
the  laws  had  been  made  hnmtine,  found  im  article  stolen  to  be  less  than 
five  sliiliings  in  valae,  in  order !«  save  theorlmtnal  tVoiti  capital  punisbiueiit. 
In  Ihe  Diary  of  John  Adiiras,  Deeember  14, 17T9,  at  Ferrol,  in  Spain,  there 
ie  a  curious  instance  of  law  requiring  that  a  convicted  parricide  should  be 
headed  up  in  a  hogshead  with  an  adder,  a  toad,  a  dog,  and  a  cat,  and 
then  oast  into  the  sea ;  but  in  a  case  that  had  recently  occurred  the 
barbarous  law  was  evaded  by  painting  these  animals  on  a  hogshead  con- 
taining the  dead  body  of  the  criminal.  (Works,  Vol.  Ill-  p.  S33.)  In 
similar  spirit,  the  famous  President  Jeannin,  high  in  the  magistracy  and 
diplomacy  of  France,  when  called  to  a  consultation  on  a  mandate  of  Charles 
the  Ninth,  at  the  epoch  of  St.  Bartholomew,  said,  "  We  must  obey  the  sover- 
eign slowly,  when  be  commands  in  anger " ;  and  he  concluded  by  asking 
"  letters  patent  before  executing  orders  so  cruel."  (Biographie  Universeile, 
art.  Jeamdtt  (Pierre.)  The  remark  of  Oasimir  P^rier,  when  Prime-Min- 
ister, to  Queen  Hortensa,  that  it  might  be  "  legal "  for  him  to  arrest  her,  but 
not  "just,"  makes  the  same  distinction.  (Guiwit,  M^moires  pour  serrir  it 
reistoira  de  roon  Temps,  Tom.  II.  p.  219.  See  onfe,  Vol.  II.  pp.  398,  899.) 
The  case  is  stated  with  perfect  moderation  by  Grotius,  when  he  says  that 
hnman  laws  have  a  binding  farce  only  when  they  are  made  in  a  humane 
manner,  not  if  they  impose  a  burden  which  is  plainly  abhorrent  to  reason 
and  Nature,  —  no"  li  "bkj  tnjimgant  i/BOd  a  raiiime  et  natara  plane  abhor- 
reaL  (De  Jnre  Belli  nc  Pacis,  Lib.  IIL  Cap,  XXIIL  v.  3;  also  Lib.  I, 
Cap.  IV.  vii.  2,  3.|  These  latter  words  aptly  describe  the  "bnvdeii "  im- 
posed by  the  Slave  Act. 


;db,Googlc 


196         FREEDOM  NATIONAL,  SLAVEEY  BECTIONAL. 

a  Pagan  land.  But  the  delighted  historian  records,  that 
from  the  multitude  of  converts  scarcely  one  was  guilty 
of  this  apostasy.  The  law  of  man  was  set  at  nought. 
Imprisonment,  torture,  death,  were  preferred.  'Hms 
did  this  people  refuse  to  trample  on  the  painted  image. 
Sir,  multitudes  among  us  will  not  be  less  steadfast 
in  refusing  to  trample  on  the  living  image  of  their 
Eedeemer. 

Finally,  Sir,  for  the  sake  of  peace  and  tranr^iiillity, 
cease  to  shock  the  Public  Conscience ;  for  the  salre  of 
the  Constitution,  cease  to  exercise  a  power  nowhere 
granted,  and  wliich  violates  inviolable  rights  expressly 
secured.  Leave  this  c[nestion  where  it  was  left  by  our 
fathers,  at  the  formation  of  our  National  Government, 
—  in  the  absolute  control  of  the  States,  the  appointed 
guardians  of  Peraonal  Liberty.  Eepeal  this  enactment. 
Let  its  terrors  no  longer  rage  through  the  land.  Mind- 
fid  of  the  lowly  whom  it  puraues,  mindful  of  the  good 
men  perplexed  by  its  requirements,  in  the  name  of 
Charity,  in  tlie  name  of  the  Constitution,  repeal  tliis 
enactment,  totally  and  without  delay.  There  is  the 
example  of  Washington;  follow  it.  There  also  are 
words  of  Oriental  piety,  most  touching  and  full  of 
warning,  which  speak  to  all  mankind,  and  now  espe- 
cially to  US:  "Beware  of  the  gi'oans  of  wounded  souls, 
since  tlie  inward  sore  will  at  lei^h  break  out.  Oppress 
not  to  the  utmost  a  single  heart ;  for  a  solitaiy  sigh  has 
power  to  overturn  a  whole  world." 


■cibyGoogIc 


ASBEEW  J.  DOWNING,  THE  UHDSCAPS  GAEDfflEE. 


The  Civil  and  Diplonmtic  Appi'Dpriation  Bill  lieiiig  under  considera- 
lion,  Mr.  Pearce,  of  Mainland,  under  instructions  from  the  Committee 
on  Pintmee,  moved  the  following  amendment ;  — 

"  For  the  payment  of  the  arrears  of  salary  due  to  the  late  Enral  Architect, 
A.J.  Downing,  deceased,  from  the  Xstof  May,  1S62,  to  the  dat«of  his  death, 
and  a  further  aliowance  to  his  widow,  eqnal  to  the  ealary  for  one  year, 
S  2,500:  Peovi/kd,  that  the  said  sum  shall  be  in  full  of  all  oh^m  for  the  ser- 
vices of  the  said  deceased,  and  for  all  models,  epecifloations,  and  drawings, 
designed  for  the  benefit  of  the  United  States,  which  nre  noUn  its  possession." 

In  the  course  of  the  debate  which  ensued,  Mr.  Sumner  Ejioke  as  fol- 

MR  PEESIDENT,  — The  latorer  is  worthy  of  Lis 
hire ;  and  I  believe  at  this  moment  there  ia  no 
question  of  charity  to  the  widow  of  the  late  Mr.  Down- 
ing. The  simple  proposition  is,  to  malie  compensation 
for  services  rendered  to  the  United  States  by  this  emi- 
nent artist  as  superintendent  of  the  pubUc  grounds  in 
Washington.  And  since  the  plans  he  has  left  behind 
and  the  impulse  he  has  given  to  improvements  here 
by  his  i-emarkable  genius  wiU  continue  to  benefit  us, 
though  he  has  been  removed,  it  is  thought  reasonable 
to  continue  his  salary  to  the  close  of  the  unexpired  year 
from  which  it  commenced.  These  plans  alone  have 
been  valued  at  five  thousand  dollars,  and  we  are  to 
have  the  advantage  of  them.    In  pursuance  of  these. 


■cibyGoogIc 


198  DOWNING,   THE    LANDSCAPE    GARDENER, 

liis  successor  will  lie  able  to  proceed  in  arranging  the 
public  gronnda,  and  in  embellishing  the  national  capi- 
tal, mtliout  further  expenditure  for  otliers.  Thus,  as  I 
said  at  the  outset,  it  is  not.  a  question  of  charity,  but 
of  compensation ;  aaid  on  tliis  gromid  I  doubt  not  the 
estate  of  the  departed  artist  deserves  the  small  pittance 
it  is  proposed  to  pay,  T"or  myself,  I  should  be  much 
happier  to  vote  a  laigpr  appropriation,  believing,  that, 
over  and  above  the  services  actually  rendered  in  the 
discharge  of  liis  duties,  these  plans  are  amply  worth  it, 
and  that  we  shall  all  feel  better  by  such  recognition  of 
our  debt. 

Few  men  in  the  public  service  have  vindicated  a  title 
to  regard  above  Mr.  Downing.  At  the  age  of  thirty- 
seven  he  has  passed  away,  "  dead  ere  his  prime,"  —  like 
Lycidas,  also, "  floating  upon  his  watery  bier,"  ^ — leaving 
behind  a  reputation  above  that  of  any  other  citizen  in 
the  beautiful  department  of  Art  to  which  he  was  devoted 
His  labors  and  his  example  cannot  be  forgotten,  I 
know  of  no  man  among  us,  in  any  sphere  of  life,  so 
young  as  he  was  at  his  death,  who  has  been  able  to  per- 
form services  of  such  true,  simple,  and  lasting  benefi- 
cenca  By  wide  and  active  superintendence  of  rural 
improvements,  by  labors  of  the  pen,  and  by  the  various 
exercise  of  his  genius,  he  has  contributed  essentially  to 
the  sum  of  human  happiness.  And  now.  Sir,  by  practi- 
cal services  here  in  Washington,  rendered  at  the  call  of 
liis  country,  he  has  earned,  it  seems  to  me,  this  small 
appropriation,  not  as  a  charity  to  his  desolate  widow, 
but  as  a  remuneration  for  labor  done.  I  hope  the 
amendment  will  be  agreed  to. 

•  Mr.  Downing  was  acoidentaUj  drowned  in  the  Iludaon  River. 


;db,Googlc 


THE  PAETY  OF  FREEDOM  :  ITS  NECESSITY  AKD 
PRACTICABILITY. 

Speech   at   the  State  Convbntios  of  the  Free-Soil  Partv  of 
1iassaceusett3,  held  at  lowell,  september  15,  1852. 


The  annnal  Slate  ConTention  of  the  Free-Soil  Party  of  Massachu- 
Betts  met  at  Lowell  September  15,  1852.  It  ivaa  orgauiMd  with  the 
following  officers :  Hon.  Stephen  C.  Phillips,  of  Salem,  President,  — 
Eodney  Frettoh,  of  New  Bedford,  Geoi^e  B.  Atwood,  of  Taunton,  Wil- 
liam. Jackson,  of  Newton,  George  F.  Williams,  of  Boston,  Charles  Beck, 
of  Cambiidgfl,  John  B.  Alley,  of  Lynn,  Benjamin  F.  Thompson,  of 
Winchester,  John  Keamith,  of  Lowell,  John  EdgeU,  of  Gardner,  Francis 
Bates,  of  Springfield,  Calvin  Maiileu,  of  Pittefield,  Vice-Presidents,  ^ 
George  M.  Brooks,  of  Concord,  Edmund  Anthony,  of  New  Bedford, 
William  S.  Rohinson,  of  Lowell,  Andrew  J.  Allien,  of  Adams,  Benja- 
min F.  White,  of  Weymouth,  Seoretaiies. 

Eloqaent  speeches  were  made  by  the  President,  Hon.  S.  C.  Phillips, 
Hon.  Henry  Wilson,  Hon.  John  W.  Grares,  Hon.  E.  L.  Keyea, 
Hon.  Rodney  French,  Dr.  Caleb  Swan,  Richard  H.  Dana,  Jr.,  Esq., 
Hon.  Homce  Mann,  Hon.  Amasa  Walker,  Hon.  Anson  Burlingame, 
and  Setli  Webb,  Jr.,  Esq.  The  resolotions  adopted  by  the  Conven- 
tion were  reported  by  Hon.  C.  F.  Adams.  Hon.  Horace  Maim  was 
nominated  as  candidate  for  Governor,  and  Hon.  Ainasa  Walker  as 
candidate  for  Lieuteiiattt-Goveruor. 

Early  in  the  proceedings  Mr.  Snniner  was  introdnoed  to  the  audience 
by  the  President.  This  incident  is  copied  from  the  report  in  the  pa- 
pers, as  is  also  the  speech  wliich  he  made,  with  the  interruptions. 

"  The  President  remarkea,  that  there  was  one  gentleman  present  whom 
the  Couveiition  wonW  all  delight  to  hearr  he  alluded  to  onr  disOnguishad 
Senator  In  Congress,  Hon.  Charles  Sumner. 

"  The  name  of  Mr.  Sumner  was  received  with  '  three  times  three '  rousing 
cheers,  and  the  waving  of  hats,  caoes,  handkerchiefs,  &c.;  which  demonstra. 
tions  of  regard  were  renewed  as  be  made  bis  appearance  on  the  platform." 


;db,Googlc 


200  THE  PAETY  OF  FREEDOM: 

Among  those  on  the  platform  was  Captwn  Drayton,  oalleil  ' '  This  Hero 
of  the  Pearl,"  recently  liberated  from  prisott  through,  the  exertions  of 
Mr.  Sumner  {anle,  p.  48),  who  took  his  seat  "  amid  the  hearty  cheers 
of  the  whole  asEemhly." 

Mr.  President,  ahd  Fellow-Citizens  of  Massa- 
chusetts : — 

I  SHOULD  be  dull  indeed,  —  dull  as  a  weed, — were 
I  insensible  to  tbis  generous,  heart-speaking  wel- 
come. After  an  absence  of  many  months,  I  have  now 
come  home  to  breathe  anew  this  invigorating  Wortheni 
air  [applause],  to  tread  again  the  free  soil  of  our  native 
Massachusetts  [cheers],  and  to  enjoy  the  sympathy  of 
friends  and  fellow-citizens.  [Senewed  applamc]  But, 
while  glad  in  yonr  greetings,  thus  bounteously  lavished, 
I  cannot  accept  them  for  myself.  I  do  not  deserve  them. 
They  belong  to  the  cause  [applame]  which  we  all  have  at 
heart,  and  which  binds  us  together.     [Cheers.] 

Fellow-citizens,  I  Iiave  not  come  here  to  make  a 
speech.  The  occasion  requires  no  such  effort.  Weary 
with  other  labors,  and  desirir^  rest,  I  have  Uttle  now  to 
say,  —  and  that  little  will  be  too  much,  if  about  myself. 
If,  at  Washington,  during  a  long  session  of  Congress, 
—  my  first  experience  of  public  life,  —  I  have  been 
able  to  do  anythii^  which  meets  yonr  acceptance,  I  am 
happy.  [Cheers.]  I  have  done  nothii^  but  my  duty. 
["Hear !  hear!"]  Passing  from  this, and  takii^  advan- 
tage of  the  Idnd  attention  with  which  you  honor  me, 
let  me  add  one  word  in  vindication  of  our  position  as 
a  national  party. 

We  are  on  the  eve  of  two  important  elections,  —  one 
of  National  officers,  and  the  other  of  State  ofdcers,  A 
President  and  Vice-President  of  the  United  States  and 
members  of  Congress  are  to  be  chosen ;  also,  Grovernor 


■cibyGoogIc 


ITS  HECESSITY  AND  PBACTICABIUTY.  201 

and  Lieutenant-Governor  of  the  Common wealtli,  and 
members  of  the  Legislature.  And  at  these  elections 
we  are  to  cast  our.  votes  so  as  most  to  advance  the 
cause  of  Freedom  under  the  National  Constitution. 
[Cheers.']  This  is  our  peculiar  object,  —  though  asso- 
ciated with  it  are  other  aims,  kindred  in'  their  humane 
and  liberal  character. 

Against  Fi'eedom  both  the  old  parties  are  banded. 
Opposed  to  each'  other  in  the  contest  for  power,  they 
concur  in  opposing  every  effort  for  the  establishment  of 
Freedom  under  the  National  Constitution.  [Ap2ylaus6.] 
Divided  as  parties,  the^  are  one  as  supporters  of  Slavery. 
On  this  c[uestion  we  can  have  no  sympathy  with  either, 
but  must  necessarily  be  against  both.  ["  Hear !  hear ! "] 
They  sustain  Slavery  in  the  District  of  Colombia :  we 
are  against  it  They  sustain  the  coastwise  Slave-Trade 
under  the  National  Flag  :  we  abhor  it.  [Cheers.]  They 
sustain  the  policy  of  sUence  on  Slavery  in  the  Territo- 
ries :  we  urge  the  voice  of  positive  prohibition.  They 
sustain  that  paragon  of  legislative  monsters, —  uncon- 
stitutional, unchristian,  and  infamous,  —  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Bill  [sematim  ] ;  we  insist  on  its  repeal.  [G^-eat 
a^pplwim:]  They  concede  to  the  Slave  Power  new  hfe 
and  protection :  we  cannot  be  content  except  with  its 
total  destruction.  [Eidhusiam.^  Such,  fellow-citizens, 
is  the  difference  between  us. 

And  now,  if  here  in  Massachusetts  there  be  any  who, 
on  grounds  of  policy  or  conscience,  feel  impelled  to  sup- 
port Slavery,  let  them  go  and  sink  in  the  embrace  of 
the  old  parties.  [Applaitse.]  There  they  belong.  On 
the  other  hand,  all  sincerely  opposed  to  Slavery,  who 
desire  to  act  against  Slavery,  who  seek  to  bear  tlieir 
testimony  for  Freedom,  who  loi^  to  carry  into  pnbHc 


■cibyGoogIc 


202  THE    PAKTY    OF   FEEEDOM  : 

affairs  those  principles  of  morality  and  Christian  duty 
which  are  the  rule  of  private  hfe, —  let  them  come  out 
from  both  the  old  parties,  and  join  us.  [Cheers.]  In 
our  organization,  with  the  declared  friends  of  Freedom, 
they  -will  iind  a  place  in  harmony  with  their  aspirations. 


There  is  one  apology,  common  to  the  supporters  of 
both  the  old  parties,  and  often  in  their  mouths,  when 
pressed  for  inconsistent  persistence  in  adherii^  to  these 
parties.  It  is  dogmatically  asserted  that  there  can  be 
but  two  parties,  —  that  a  new  party  is  impossible,  par- 
ticularly in  our  country, —  and  that,  therefore,  all  per- 
sons, however  "opposed  to  Slavery,  must  he  content  in 
one  of  the  old  parties.  This  assumption,  which  is  with- 
out foundation  in  reason,  is  so  often  pwt  forth,  that  it 
has  acquired  a  certain  currency ;  and  many,  who  reason 
hastily,  or  implicitly  follow  otlieis,  have  adopted  it  as 
the  all-sufficient  excuse  for  their  conduct.  Confessii^ 
their  own  opposition  to  Slavery,  they  yield  to  the  domi- 
nation of  party,  and  become  dumb.  All  this  is  wrong 
morally,  and  therefore  must  be  wrong  practically. 

Party,  in  its  true  estate,  is  the  natm-al  expression  and 
agency  of  different  forms  of  opinion  on  important  pubHc 
questions,  and  itself  assumes  different  forms  precisely 
according  to  the  prevalence  of  different  opinions.  Thus, 
in  the  early  Italian  republics  there  were  for  a  wlule  the 
factions  of  Guelphs  and  Ghibelhnes,  rival  supporters  of 
Pope  and  Emperor,  —  also  of  Whites  and  Blacks,  taldng 
their  names  from  the  color  of  their  respective  badges, — 
and  in  Ei^land,  the  two  factions  of  the  White  and  Red 
Eoses,  in  which  was  involved  the  succession  to  the 
crown.  In  all  these  cases  the  party  came  into  being, 
died  out,  or  clianged  with   the  objects  originating  it. 


■cibyGoogIc 


ITS  KECE8SITY  AND  PRACTICABILITY.  203 

If  there  be  in  a  community  only  two  chief  antagonist 
■opinions,  then  there  will  be  but  two  parties  embodying 
these  opiniong.  But  as  other  opinions  practically  pre- 
vail anil  seek  vent,  so  must  patties  change  or  multiply. 
This  is  so  strongly  the  conclusion  of  reason  and  philoso- 
phy, that  it  could  not  be  doubted,  even  if  there  were 
no  examples  of  such  change  and  multiplicity.  But  we 
need  only  turn  to  the  recent  history  of  France  and  Eng- 
land, the  two  countries  where  opinion  has  the  freest 
scope,  to  lind  such  examples. 

Thus,  for  instance,  in  France,  —  and  I  dwell  on  this 
point  becaxise  I  have  myself  observed,  in  conversation, 
that  it  is  of  practical  importance,  —  tmder  Louis  Phi- 
lippe, anterior  to  the  late  Eepublic,  there  was  the  party 
of  LegitimistSj  supporters  of  the  old  branch  of  Bourbons, 
and  the  party  of  Orleanists,  supporters  of  the  existing 
throne ;  these  two  corresponding  at  the  time,  in  relative 
rank  and  power,  to  our  Whigs  and  Democrats.  Besides 
these  was  a  third  party,  the  small  hand  of  RepiMicans, 
represented  m  the  Legislature  hy  a  few  persons  only,  but 
strong  in  principles  and  purposes,  which  in  February, 
1848,  prevailed  over  both  the  others.  ,  {Applause.}  On 
the  establishment  of  the  RepubUc,  the  multiplication  of 
parties  continued,  until,  with  the  freedom  of  opinion  and 
the  freedom  of  the  press,  all  were  equally  overthrown 
by  Louis  Napoleon,  and  their  place  supplied  by  the  en- 
forced unity  of  despotism. 

In  England,  the  most  important  measure  of  recent 
reform,  the  abohtion  of  the  laws  imposing  a  protective 
duty  on  com,  was  carried  only  by  a  third  party.  Neither 
of  the  two  old  parties  could  be  brought  to  adopt  this 
measure  and  press  it  to  consummation.  A  powerful 
pubhc   opinion,  thwarted  in   the  regular  parties,  had 


■cibyGoogIc 


204  THE   PAETY    OF   FKEliDOM  : 

recourse  to  a  new  one,  neither  Whig  nor  Tory,  but 
formed  fi-om  both  the  old  ones,  where  Sir  Robert  Peel, 
the  great  Conservative  leader,  took  his  place,  side  by 
side,  in  honorable  coalition,  with  Mr.  Cobden,  the  great 
Liberal  leader.  ["Hear!  hear!"]  In  this  way  the 
Com  Laws  were  finally  overthrown.  The  multiplicity 
of  parties  engendered  by  this  contest  still  continues  in 
England.  At  the  general  election  for  the  new  Parha^ 
ment  which  has  just  taken  place,  the  strict  lines  of 
ancient  parties  seemed  to  be  effaced,  and  many  were  re- 
turned, not  as  Whigs  and  Tories,  but  as  Protectionists 
and  Anti-Protectionists. 

Thus  by  example  in  our  own  day  we  confirm  the 
principle  of  political  philosophy,  that  parties  naturally 
adapt  themselves  in  character  and  number  to  prevaihng 
pubhc  opinion. 

At  the  present  time,  in  our  country,  there  ejdsts  a 
deep,  controUii^,  conscientious  feeling  agauist  Slavery. 
[Okeers,']  Ton  and  I,  Sir,  and  all  of  us,  confess  it. 
While  recc^izing  the  Constitution,  we  desire  to  do  ev- 
erything in  our  power  to  reheve  ourselves  of  responsi- 
bility for  this  terrible  wrong.  ["Yes!  yes!"]  We  would 
vindicate  the  Constitution,  and  the  National  Govern- 
ment it  has  estabhshed,  from  all  participation  m  this 
outrage,  [dieers.]  Both  the  old  political  parties,  for- 
getful of  the  Fathers,  and  of  the  spirit  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, not  only  refuse  to  be  agents  or  representatives  in 
any  degree  of  our  convictions,  but  expressly  discourage 
and  denounce  them.  Thus  baftted  in  effort  for  utter- 
ance, these  convictions  naturally  seek  expression  in  a 
new  agency,  the  party  of  Freedom.  [Clieers.]  Such  is 
the  party,  representing  the  great  doctrines  of  Human 
Eights,  as  enunciated  in  our  Declaration  of  Indepen- 


■cibyGooglc 


ITS   NECESSITY  AND   PEACTIOABILITT.  205 

dence,  and  inspired  by  a  truly  Democratic  sentiment, 
now  assembled  here  under  the  name  of  the  Free  De- 
mocracy.    [Oheers.'j 

The  rising  public  opinion  against  Slavery  cannot 
flow  in  the  old  political  channels.  It  is  impeded,  choked, 
and  dammed  back.  But  if  not  through  the  old  parties, 
then  over  the  old  parties  [tr&mendffus  cheering],  this  ir- 
resistible current  shall  find  its  way.  [Untkvsiasm.]  It 
cannot  be  permanently  stopped.  If  the  old  parties  will 
not  become  its  oi^ans,  they  must  become  its  victims. 
[Oheers.]  The  party  of  Fi'eedom  wiU  certainly  prevail 
[Sensaiion,']  It  may  be  by  entering  into  and  possess- 
ing one  of  the  old  parties,  filling  it  with  our  own  strong 
life;  or  it  may  be  by  drawing  to  itself  the  good  and 
true  from  both  who  are  unwilling  to  continue  in  a  po- 
litical combination  when  it  ceases  to  represent  their 
convictions ;  but,  in  one  way  or  the  other,  its  ultimate 
triumph  is  sure.  [Great  applause.]  Of  this  let  no  man 
doubt.     [Bepeated  cheers.] 

At  this  moment  we  are  in  a  minority.  At  the  last 
popular  election  in  Massachusetts,  there  were  twenty- 
eight  thousand  Free-Soilers,  forty-three  thousand  Dem- 
ocrats, and  sixty-four  thousand  Whigs.  But  this  is  no 
reason  for  discouragement.  Accordii^  to  recent  esti- 
mates, the  population  of  the  whole  world  amounts  to 
about  eight  hundred  millions.  Of  these  only  two  hun- 
dred and  sixty  millions  are  Christians,  wliile  the  re- 
maining five  hundred  and  forty  millions  are  mainly 
Mahometans,  Brahmins,  and  Idolaters.  Because  the 
Christians  are  in  this  minority,  that  is  no  reason  for 
renouncing  Christianity,  and  for  surrendering  to  the 
false  religions  [cheers] ;  nor  do  we  doubt  that  Christian- 
ity will  yet  prevail  over  the  whole  earth,  as  the  waters 


■cibyGoogIc 


206  THE  PARTY  OP  FEEEDOM : 

cover  the  sea.  ["  Sear  I  hear ! "]  The  friends  of  Free 
dom  in  Massachusetts  are  likewise  in  a  minority;  but 
tliey  will  not  therefore  renounce  I'reedom  [cheers],  nor 
surrender  to  the  political  Mahometans,  Brahmins,  and 
Idolaters  of  Baltimore  ["  Never  !  never ! "] ;  nor  can  they 
doubt  that  their  cause,  like  Christianity,  wiU  yet  pre- 
vail.    [Uiithusiastir,  cheers.] 

Our  party  commends  itself.  But  it  is  also  com- 
mended by  our  candidates.  [  Cheers.}  In  all  that  makes 
the  eminent  civilian  or  the  accomplished  statesman  fit 
for  the  responsibilities  of  government,  they  will  proudly 
compare  with  any  of  their  competitors  [applaus^,  while 
they  are  dear  to  our  hearts  as  able,  well-tried,  loyal 
supporters  of  those  vital  principles  which  we  seek  to 
establish  under  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States. 
[Applause.]  In  the  Senate,  Mr.  Hale  [cheers]  is  admit- 
ted to  be  foremost  in  aptitude  and  readiness  for  debate, 
whether  in  the  general  legislation  of  the  country,  or  in 
constant  and  valiant  championship  of  our  cause,  [Ap- 
plause.] His  genial  and  sun-like  nature  irradiates  the 
antagonism  of  political  controversy  [cheers],  while  Ms 
active  and  practical  mind,  richly  stored  with  various 
experience,  never  fails  to  render  good  service.  [Great 
cheerinff.] 

Of  Mr.  Jidian,  our  candidate  for  the  Vice-Presidency, 
["  Hear  !  hear !"]  let  me  say  simply,  that,  in  ability  and 
devotion  to  our  principles,  he  is  a  worthy  compeer  of 
Mr.  Hale.  To  vote  for  such  men  will  itself  be  a  pleas- 
ure. But  it  will  be  doubly  so,  when  we  reflect  that  in 
this  way  we  do  something  to  accomplish  a  noble  work, 
with  which  the  happiness,  welfare,  and  fame  of  our 
country  are  indissolubly  connected,  [Repeated  and 
enthusiastic  cheers.] 


■cibyGoogIc 


ITS  NECESSITY  AND  PEACTICABILITT  207 

With  such  a  cause  and  such  candidates,  no  man  can 
be  disheaxtened.  The  tempest  may  blow,  — hut  oure  ig 
a  life-boat,  not  to  be  harmed  by  -wind  or  -wave.  The 
Genius  of  Liberty  sita  at  the  helm.  I  hear  her  voice  of 
cheer,  saying,  "  Whoso  sails  with  me  comes  to  shore ! " 

Mr.  Snmner  leanioed  Ms  seat  amid  heartiest  and  long-protmeted 


■cibyGoogIc 


CITIL  SDPERINTENDENTS  OF  ARMORIES. 


The  Aitny  Appropriatioii  Bill  being  under  discussion,  Mr.  Davis,  of 
Massacliiisetts,  moved  the  following  amcndnicnt ;  — 

"  That  from  and  after  the  first  day  of  July  next,  the  Act  of  Congrass 
approved  Aogust  23,  1842,  be  bo  modified,  that  the  Piesident  may,  if  in 
his  opinion  tha  public  interest  demands  it,  place  over  any  of  the  armorira 
B,  superintendent  who  does  not  belong  to  the  Aroiy." 

la  the  course  of  the  debate,  Mr.  Sumner  spoke  as  followa. 

MR.  PEESIDENT,  —  I  do  not  desire  to  speak  upon 
the  general  subj  ect  of  the  manufacture  of  arms  un- 
der the  authority  af  the  United  States,  which  has  been 
opened  in  debate  by  honorable  Senators.  What  I  have 
to  say  will  be  on  the  precise  question  before  the  Senate, 
and  nothir^  else.  That  question,  as  I  understand  it,  is  on 
the  amendment  proposed  by  my  colleague  [Mr.  Davis], 
according  to  which  the  Act  of  1842  is  to  be  so  far  modi- 
fled,  that  the  President,  in  his  discretion,  may  place  over 
the  armories  persons  not  of  the  army, — leaving  it,  there- 
fore, to  his  judgment  whether  the  su]5erintendent  shall 
be  a  military  man  or  a  civilian.     This  is  all. 

The  Senate  is  exhorted  not  to  act  precipitately.  But 
the  character  of  this  proposition  excludes  all  idea  of 
precipitation.  We  do  not  determine  absolutely  that  the 
system  shall  be  changed,  but  simply  that  it  may  be 
changed  in  the  discretion  of  the  President.  This  discre- 
tion, which  wiR  be  exercised  only  after  ample  inquiry, 


■cibyGoogIc 


CIVn-  SUPERINTENDEKTS   OF  ARMORIES.  209 

stands  iu  the  way  of  all  precipitation ;  and  this  is  my 
answer  to  the  Senator  from  Illinois  [Mr.  Shields]. 

Again,  it  is  urged,  that  under  a  military  head  the 
armories  are  better  administered  than  they  would  be 
under  a  civil  head,  and  that  the  arms  are  better  and 
cheaper ;  and  here  my  friend  from  South  Carolina,  who 
sits  before  me  [Mr.  Butler],  dwelt  with  bis  accus- 
tomed glow  upon  the  success  with  which  this  manufac- 
ture is  conducted  at  the  national  armories,  and  the  ex- 
tent to  which  it  is  recognized  in  Europe.  But,  Sir,  in 
the  precise  question  before  you  the  merits  of  the  armories 
are  not  involved.  We  do  not  underlalce  to  judge  the 
military  superintendents  or  their  worts.  The  determi- 
nation of  this  question  is  referred  to  the  President ;  and 
this  is  my  answer  to  the  Senator  from  South  Carolina. 

The  objections  to  this  amendment  of  my  colleague, 
then,  seem  to  disappear.  But  there  are  two  distinct  ar- 
guments in  its  favor,  which,  at  the  present  moment,  do 
not  seem  to  me  susceptible  of  any  answer. 

In  the  first  place,  there  are  complaints  against  the 
existing  system,  which  ought  to  be  heard.  A  memorial 
from  five  hundred  legal  votei's  of  Springfield,  now  on 
your  table,  bears  testimony  to  them.  Letters  to  myself 
and  others,  from  persons  whose  opinions  I  am  bound  to 
r^ard,  set  them  forth  sometimes  in  very  strong  lan- 
guage. The  administration  of  the  arsenal  at  Springfield 
is  commended  by  many;  but  there  are  others  who  judge 
it  differently.  As  now  conducted,  it  is  sometimes  rep- 
resented to  be  the  seat  of  oppressive  conduct,  and  the 
occasion  of  heart-burning  and  strife,  often  running  into 
local  politics.  In  the  eyes  of  some  this  arsenal  is  little 
better  than  a  sore  on  that  beautiful  town.  Now  on 
these  complaints  and  allegations  I  express  no  opinion. 


■cibyGoogIc 


^lU  CIVIL   SUPEEINTEKDENTS   OP  ARMORIES, 

I  do  not  affirm  tlieir  truth  or  untruth.  What  I  know 
of  the  superintendent  makes  it  difficult  for  me  to  Ije- 
lieve  that  anything  unjust,  oppressive,  or  hard  can  pro- 
ceed from  him.  But  the  whole  case  justifies  inquiry  at 
least,  and  such  will  be  secured  by  the  proposition  before 
the  genat«.     This  is  the  spiallest  thii^  we  can  do. 

This  proposition  is  enforced  by  another  consideration 
which  seems  to  me  entitled  to  weight.  I  have  nothing 
to  say  now  on  the  general  question  of  reducing  the 
army  or  modifyii^  the  existing  military  system.  But  I 
do  affii-m,  confidently,  that  the  genius  of  our  institutions 
favors  civil  Jife  rather  than  military  life,  —  and  that,  in 
harmony  with  this,  it  is  our  duty,  whenever  the  public 
interests  wiU  permit,  to  limit  and  restiict  tlie  sphere  of 
military  influence.  This  is  not  a  military  monarchy, 
where  the  soldier  is  supreme,  but  a  republic,  where  the 
soldier  yields  to  the  civilian.  But  the  law,  as  it  now 
stands,  gives  to  the  soldier  an  absolute  preference  in  a 
service  which  is  not  military,  and  which,  from  its  na- 
ture, belongs  to  civil  life.  The  manufacture  of  arras  is 
a  mechanical  pursuit,  and,  for  myself,  I  can  see  no  rea- 
son why  it  should  not  be  placed  in  chaise  of  one  bred 
to  the  business.  Among  the  intelligent  mechanics  of 
Massachusetts  there  are  many  fuUy  fit  to  be  at  the 
head  of  the  arsenal  at  Springfield ;  but  by  the  existing 
law  all  these  are  austerely  excluded  from  any  such 
trust.  The  idea  which  has  fallen  from  so  many  Sena- 
tors, that  the  superintendent  of  an  armory  ought  to  be 
a  military  man,  that  a  military  man  only  is  compe- 
tent, or  even  that  a  military  man  is  more  competent 
than  a  civilian,  seems  to  me  as  illogical  as  the  jocular 
fallacy  of  Dr.  Johnson,  that  he  "who  drives  fat  oxen 
should  himself  he  fat." 


■cibyGoogIc 


NECESSITY  OF  UlflON  TO  UPHOID  FREEDOM. 

Letter  to  a  Rhode  Island  Committee,  March  26,  1853. 


Washin&ton,  Marct  26,  1853. 

DEAE  SIR,  —  I  cannot  promiae  myself  the  pleasure 
of  being  in  Ehode  Island  at  the  time  you  propose, 
and  am  therefore  constrained  to  decline  the  invitation 
with  which  you  have  honored  me. 

But  let  me  assure  you,  that,  in  all  our  political  con- 
tests, I  see  no  question  comparable  in  practical  impor- 
tance, as  surely  there  is  none  equal  in  moral  grandeur, 
to  tliat  which  is  presented  by  the  Free  Democracy,  and 
which  now  enhsts  yoni  sympathies. 

Both  the  old  parties  unite  in  upholding  Slavery.     It 
becomes  all  good  citizens  to  unite  in  upholding  Free- 
dom ;  nor  should  any  one  believe  that  his  single  vote 
may  not  exert  an  influence  on  the  stru^le. 
Believe  me,  dear  Sir,  faithfully  youre, 

Chakies  Sumner. 

George  L,  Clarke,  Chairraim  of  the  State  Central  Coimnittee  of 
th?  Prce  Democracy  of  Ehode  lisland. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AGAINST  SECEECT  IN  PROCEEDINGS  OF- THE  SENATE. 

Speech  in  tub  Senate,  on  the  Proposition  to  limit  the  Seoret 
Sessions  of  the  Senate,  April  6  1853. 


The  following  resolution  was  submitted  by  Mr.  Chase,  of  Ohio. 

"fleioloed,  That  all  sessions  and  all  proceedings  of.  the  Senate  shall  be 
public  and  open,  except  when  mutters  communicated  in  confidence  by  the 
President  sliall  be  received  and  considered,  and  in  such  other  onses  as  the 
SenHt«  by  resolution  iVoni  time  to  thne  shall  specially  ofder;  and  so  much 
of  the  thirty-eighth,  thirty-ninth,  and  fortieth  rules  as  may  be  inconsistent 
with  this  rule  is  hereby  rescinded." 

In  the  debate  which  ensued,  Mr.  Sumner  spoke  as  follows. 


M^ 


FR.  PEESIDENT,  —  Party  aUusions  and  party  con- 
— L  siderations  liave  been  brought  to  bear  upon  this 
question.  I  wish  to  regard  it  for  a  moment  in  the  light 
of  the  Constitution,  and  in  the  spirit  of  our  institutions. 
In  the  Constitution  there  is  no  injunction  of  secrecy  on 
any  of  the  proceedings  of  the  Senate ;  nor  is  there  any 
requirement  of  publicity.  To  the  Senate  is  left  the  de- 
termination of  its  rules  of  proceeding.  Iliua  abstaining 
from  all  regulation  of  this  matter,  the  framers  of  the 
Constitution  obviously  regarded  it  as  in  all  respects 
■within  the  discretion  of  the  Senate,  to  be  exercised  from 
time  to  time  as  it  thinks  best. 

The  Senate  possesses  three  important  functions :  first, 
the  legislative  or  parliamentary  power,  where  it  acts 
concurrently  with  the  House  of  Eepresentatives,  as  well 


■cibyGoogIc 


AGAIMST  SECRECY  IN  THE  SENATE.  213 

as  tlie  President ;  secondly,  the  diplomatic  power,  or  that 
of  "advice  and  consent"  to  treaties  with  foreign  countries 
in  concurrence  with  the  President;  and,  thirdly,  the 
executive  power,  or  that  of  "  advice  and  consent "  to 
nominations  hy  the  President  for  offices  under  tiie  Con- 
stitution. I  say  nothiug  of  another,  rarely  called  into 
activity,  the  sole  power  to  try  impeachments. 

At  the  first  organization  of  the  Government,  the  pro- 
ceedings of  the  Senate,  whether  in  legislation  or  on 
treaties  or  nominations,  were  with  closed  doors.  In 
this  respect  legislative  husiness  and  executive  business 
were  alike.  This  continued  down  to  the  second  session 
of  the  Third  Congress,  in  1794,  when,  in  pursuance  of  a 
formal  I'esolution,  the  galleries  were  opened  so  long  as 
the  Senate  were  eng^ed  in  their  legislative  capacity, 
unless  where,  in  the  opinion  of  the  Senate,  secrecy 
was  rec[uired ;  and  this  rule  has  continued  ever  since. 
Here  was  an  exercise  of  discretion,  in  obvious  har- 
mony with  public  sentiment  and  the  spuit  of  our  in- 
stitutions. 

The  change  now  proposed  goes  still  further.  It  opens 
the  doors  on  all  occasions,  whether  legislative  or  ex- 
ecutive, except  when  specially  ordered  otherwise.  The 
Senator  from  South  Carolina  [Mr.  Butler]  says  that 
the  Senate  is  a  confidential  body,  and  should  be  ready 
to  receive  confidential  communications  from  the  Presi- 
dent. But  this  will  still  be  the  case,  if  we  adopt 
the  resolution  now  submitted  to  us.  The  limitation 
proposed  seems  adequate  to  aU.  exigencies,  while  the 
general  rule  will  be  publicity.  Executive  sessions  with 
closed  doors,  shrouded  from  the  public  gajse  and  public 
criticism,  constitute  an  exceptional  part  of  our  system, 
too  much  in  harmony  with  the  proceedings  of  other 


■cibyGoogIc 


214  AGAINST    SECRECY   IN   THE    SENATE. 

Governments  less  lilDeral  in  character.  The  genius  of 
our  institutions  requires  publicity.  The  ancient  itonian, 
who  hade  liis  architect  so  to  construct  his  house  that  his 
guests  and  all  that  he  did  could  he  seen  by  the  world, 
is  a  fit  model  for  the  American  people. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  GERMAN  EMIGEAIT  MUST  BE  AGAINST 
SLAVEET. 

Letteb  to  Lewis  Tappax,  Em.,  May  17, 1853. 


Boston,  May  17, 1853. 

DEAR  SIR,  —  I  know  Mr.  Schmidt  by  the  good 
name  he  has  won,  and  I  have  aJao  had  the  pleas- 
ure of  making  his  personal  acquaintance.  I  under- 
stand him  to  he  a  scholar,  believing  in  the  demand 
which  Liberty  in  our  country  now  makes- upon  every 
citizen.  Thus  endowed  in  mind  and  character,  he  will 
address  his  compatriots  from  Grermany,  in  their  own 
language,  with  persuasive  power.  I  trust  he  will  find 
the  opportunity  he  coveta ;  and  I  know  of  none  which 
promises  better  than  his  present  plan  of  a  Weekly  Ger- 
man Antislavery  Newspaper  at  Washington. 

The  number  of  persons  to  be  addressed  by  such  a 
journal  is  very  laige ;  and  they  should  be  easy  converts. 
The  German  emigrant  who  is  not  against  Slavery  here 
leads  us  to  doubt  the  sincerity  of  his  opposition  to  the 
Tyranny  he  has  left  behind  in  his  native  land. 
Believe  me,  dear  Sir,  faithfully  yours, 

Charles  Sumnee. 
Lewis  Tappan,  Esq, 


■cibyGoogIc 


POWERS  OP  THE  STATil  OVER  THE  MILITIA: 
EXEMPTIONS  rOR  CONSCIENTIOUS  SCRUPLES. 


■p  MAaaACHDSETTs,'  June  21,  ] 


Propositions  of  amendment  on  the  general  subject  of  the  Militia 
being  under  consideration  in  Committee  of  the  Whole,  Mr,  Snmner 
spote  as  follons. 

I  SHOULD  like  to  call  the  attention  of  the  Commit- 
tee to  the  precise  question  on  which  we  are  to  vote. 
This  does  not,  as  it  seems  to  me,  properly  open  the  dis- 
cussion to  which  we  have  heen  listening.  I  do  not  un- 
derstand that  it  involves  the  topics  introduced  by  my 
friend  opposite  [Mr,  Wilson],  — the  present  condition 
of  Europe,  the  prospects  of  the  hheral  cause  in  that  quar- 
ter of  the  globe,  or  the  extent  to  which  that  cause  may 
be  affected  by  a  contemporaneous  movement  for  peace, 
Nor  do  I  understand  that  the  important  considerations 
introduced  by  the  gentleman  on  my  right  [Mr.  Whit- 
ney, of  Boylaton],  regardmg  the  extent  to  which  Gov- 
ernment may  be  intrusted  with  the  power  of  the  sword, 
can  materially  influence  our  decision.  I  put  these 
things  aside  at  this  time. 

1  The  members  of  this  Convention  were  not  required  to  have  tbeir 
domioiles  in  the  plaeos  which  tliey  represcnwd.  Mr,  Sunnier  sat  as 
member  fcr  MarsliiieM,  by  which  place  he  was  chosen  while  absent  from 


■cibyGoogIc 


EXEMPTIONS   FOK   CONSCIENTIOUS  SCRUPLES.       217 

The  question  ia  on  the  final  passage  of  the  fifteen 
resolutions  reported  by  the  Committee  on  the  Militia, 
And  here  let  me  adopt  a  suggestion  dropped  by  my 
friend  opposite  [Mr.  Wilson].  He  regretted,  if  I  under- 
stood him,  that  this  whole  subject  was  not  compressed 
into  one  or  two  resolutions.     Am  I  right  ? 

Mr,  Wilsok,     The  gentleman  is  correct. 

Me.  Sumnee.  I  ^ree  with  him,  I  regret  that  it  was 
not  compressed  into  one  or  two  resolutions.  I  object 
to  these  resolutions  for  several  reasons.  In  the  first 
place,  there  are  too  many ;  in  the  second  place,  at  least 
two  of  them  seem  to  be  an  assumption  of  power  beloi^- 
ing  to  Congress,  and  therefore  at  least  of  doubtful  con- 
stitutionahty ;  and,  in  the  third  place,  because  twelve 
of  them  undertake  to  control  matters  which  it  were 
better  to  leave  with  the  Legislature, 

On  the  formation  of  the  Constitution  of  Massachu- 
setts, in  1780,  it  was  natural  that  our  fathers  should 
introduce  details  with  regard  to  the  militia  and  its  or- 
ganization. The  Constitution  of  the  United  States  had 
not  then  been  made.  But  since  the  estabhshment  of 
tliis  Constitution  the  whole  condition  of  the  militia  is 
changed.  Among  the  powers  expressly  given  to  Con- 
gress is  the  power  "  to  provide  for  oi^nizing,  arming, 
and  disciplining  the  militia,  and  for  governing  such  part 
of  them  as  may  be  employed  in  the  service  of  the  United 
States,  reserving  to  the  States  respectively  the  appoint- 
ment of  the  officers,  and  the  authorily  of  training  the  mi- 
litia according  to  the  discipline  prescribed  by  Congress." 
And  Congress  has  proceeded  to  exercise  this  power  by 
the  organization  of  a  national  militia.  Whatever  might 
have  been  the  original  inducement  to  multiform  pro™- 
ions  on  this  subject  in  the  Constitution  of  Massachu- 


■cibyGoogIc 


218       POWEKS   OF  THE   STATE   OVER   THE   MILITIA: 

setts,  none  such  exists  at  this  day,  and  it  is  impolitic  at 
least  to  introduce  them. 

I  fear  that  they  are  more  tlian  impolitic.  I  ■will  not 
ai^e  here  the  question  of  Constitutional  Law ;  but  I 
appeal  to  the  better  judgment  of  my  professional  breth- 
ren ■ —  and  I  am  liappy  to  see  some  of  them  lingering  at 
this  late  hour —  that  any  attempt  on  the  part  of  the 
State  to  interfere,  in  any  way,  by  addition  or  subtrac- 
tion, with  the  organization  of  the  national  militn,  is  an 
experiment  which  we  should  not  introduce  into  the  per- 
manent text  of  our  oi^nic  law.  If  the  decisions  ot  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  on  the  powers  of 
s  are  to  prevail,  then,  it  seems  to  me,  any  butb 
t,  in  a  case  where  the  original  power  of  Con- 
gress is  clear,  will  be  unconstitutional  and  void.  In 
the  famous  case  of  Pfigg  v.  Pemisylvama,  after  an  elab- 
orate discussion  at  tlie  bar,  all  State  legislation  on  the 
subject  of  fugitive  slaves  was  declared  unconstitutional 
and  void,  while  Congress  is  recognized  as  the  sole  de- 
pository of  power  on  this  subject.  According  to  my 
recollection,  it  was  expressly  held  that  legislation  by 
Congress  excluded  all  State  legislation  on  the  same  sub- 
ject, whether  to  control,  qualify,  or  superadd  to  the  rem- 
edy enacted  by  Congress.  I  commend  gentlemen,  now 
so  swift  with  these  provisions,  to  the  study  of  this  prece- 
dent. It  is  comparatively  recent ;  and  the  principle  of 
interpretation  which  it  establishes  is  applicable  to  State 
laws  on  the  militia,  even  though  entirely  inapphcable 
to  State  laws  on  fugitive  slaves,  —  for  the  simple  reason, 
that  in  the  former  case  the  original  power  of  Congress 
is  clear,  while  in  the  latter  it  is  denied. 

But  the  States  are  not  without  power  over  the  militia. 
In .  the  very  grant  to  Congress  is  a  reservation  to  them 


■cibyGoogIc 


EXEMPTIONS  rOE   CONSCIENTIOUS   SCRUPLES.       219 

as  follows:  "reserving  to  the  States  respectively  the 
appointment  of  the  officers,  and  the  authority  of  train- 
ing the  militia  according  to  the  discipline  prescribed 
hj  Congress."  And  here  is  precisely  what  the  States 
can  do.  They  may  appoint  the  officers  and  train  the 
militia. 

Now,  Sir,  the  first  two  resolutions  before  us  transcend 
the  powers  of  the  State.  They  touch  the  enrolment 
and  oiganization  of  the  militia,  and  on  tliis  account  are 
an  assumption  of  power  forbidden  by  the  principle  to 
which  I  have  referred.  The  other  thirteen  resolutions, 
with  the  exception  of  the  seventh,  are  in  the  nature  of 
a  military  code,  concerning  the  choice  of  officers,  all  of 
which  should  be  left  to  the  action  of  the  Legislature. 

In  conformity  with  these  \dews,  Mr.  Chairman,  and 
in  the  hope  of  presenting  a  proposition  on  which  the 
Convention  may  unite.  I  propose  to  strike  out  all  after 
the  preamble  and  insert  two  resolutions,  aa  follows. 

Art.  1.  The  GoTornor  shall  be  the  Commander-in-Chief  of 
the  Army  and  Navy  of  the  State,  and  tlie  Militia  thereof, 
excepting  when  these  forces  shall  be  actually  in  the  service 
of  the  United  States,  —  and  shall  have  power  to  call  out  the 
same  to  aid  in  the  execution  of  the  laws,  to  suppress  insur- 
rection, and  to  repel  invasion. 

Art.  2.  The  appointment  of  officers  and  the  training  of 
the  Militia  shall  be  regulated  in  such  manner  as  may  here- 
after be  deemed  expedient  by  the  Legislature ;  and  all  per- 
sons, who  from  scruples  of  conscience  shall  he  averse  to 
bearing  arms,  shall  he  excused  on  such  conditions  as  shall 
hereafter  be  prescribed  by  law. 

The  first  of  these  resolutions  is  identical  with  the 
seventh  resolution  of  the  Committee.  The  second  pro- 
vides for  the  exercise  by  the  Legislature  of  powers  ex- 


■cibyGooglc 


220        POWERS  OP  THE  STATE   OYER  THE  MILITIA. 

pressly  reserved  to  the  States  over  tlio  appointment  of 
officers  and  the  training  of  the  militia ;  and  takii^  ad- 
vantage of  the  Act  of  Congreaa  which  allows  the  States 
to  determine  who  shall  he  exempted  from  military  duty, 
it  plants  in  the  text  of  the  Constitution  a  clause  by 
which  this  immunity  is  secured  to  all  persons  who 
from  scruples  of  conscience  are  averse  to  bearing  arms. 
I  helieve  we  cannot  go  far  heyond  these  without  doing 
too  much,  while  these  seem  to  me  enough. 


■cibyGoogIc 


POWERS  OF  THE  STATE  OVER  THE  MILITIA : 

COIOEED  COIPANIES. 

Speech  in  Cokve.vtion  to  revise  and  amend  the  Constitution 

OF  Massachusetts,  June  22,  1853. 


On  this  proposition  Mr.  Sumner  spoke  as  follows. 

I  HAVE  a  suggestion  for  my  friend  opposite  [Mr. 
Wilson],  in  regard  to  the  form  of  his  proposition, 
which,  if  he  accepts  it,  will,  as  it  seems  to  me,  abso- 
lutely remove  his  proposition  from  the  criticism  of  my 
most  eloquent  friend  before  me  [Mr.  Choate],  and  from 
the  criticism  of  other  gentlemen  who  have  addressed  the 
Convention.  I  surest  to  strike  out  the  word  "militia," 
and  substitute  the  words  "military  companies,"  so  tliat 
his  proposition  will  read,  "  that  in  the  organization  of 
the  volunteer  military  companies  of  the  Commonwealth 
tliere  shall  be  no  distinction  of  color  or  race." 

Mb.  Wilson.  I  accept  the  suggestion,  and  will  amend 
my  proposition  accordingly. 

Me.  Sumsek.  Kow  tlie  proposition,  as  amended,  I 
aasert,  is  absolutely  consistent  with  the  Constitution 
of  the  United  States,  and,  I  believe,  in  conformity  with 
the  public  sentiment  of  Massachusetts. 

A  brief  inquiry  wiU  show  that  it  is  consistent  with 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States,  and  in  n 


■cibyGoogIc 


222        POWERS  OF  THE  STATE   OVER  THE  MILITLA  : 

interferes  with  the  organization  of  the  National  Militia. 
That  Constitution  provides  for  organizing^  arming,  and 
disciplining  the  militia,  and  gives  Congress  full  power 
over  the  suhject, — in  which  particular,  he  it  observed, 
it  is  clearly  distinguishable  from  that  of  fugitive  slaves, 
over  whom  no  such  power  is  given.  To  be  more  ex- 
plicit, I  will  read  the  clause.  It  is  found  in  the  loi^ 
list  of  enumerated  powers  of  Coi^ress,  and  is  as  follows; 
"The  Congress  shall  have  power  to  provide  for  oi^n- 
izing,  arming,  and  disciplining  the  militia,  and  for  gov- 
erning such  part  of  them  as  may  be  employed  in  the 
service  of  the  United  States  leserving  to  the  States 
respectively  the  appointment  of  the  officers,  and  the 
autliority  of  trainmg  the  mihtia  according  to  the  disci- 
pline prescribed  by  Congress."  And  then,  at  the  close 
of  the  section,  it  is  further  declared,  that  Congress  shall 
have  power  "  to  make  ail  laws  which  sJuxU  be  necessary 
and  proper  for  carrying  into  execution  the  foregoing 
powers." 

In  pursuance  of  this  power.  Congress  has  proceeded, 
by  various  laws,  "  to  provide  for  oi^nizing,  arming,  and 
discipUning  the  militia,  and  for  governing  such  part  of 
them  as  may  be  emplojed  m  tlie  ser\iue  of  the  United 
States."  The  eaihest  ot  these  laws,  'itiU  m  force,  is 
entitled  "An  act  moie  effectually  to  pio\ide  for  the 
national  defence,  by  estahltJimg  an  imifwni  militia 
throughout  the  United  States  ^  Thii  was  followed  by 
several  acts  in  addition  Cot^^ess,  then,  has  under- 
taken to  exercise  the  po\\er  of  "oij;ani^mof '  the  militia 
under  the  Constitution 

Here  the  question  ariSLS,  to  whit  evtont,  if  any,  this 

power,  when  alieady  exercised  by  Congress,  is  exclusive 

1  Act  of  May  S,  1793,  ch.  33. 


■cibyGoogIc 


COLORED   COMPANIES.  223 

in  character.  Among  the  powers  delegated  to  Congress 
tliere  may  be  some  not  for  the  time  being  exercised. 
For  instance,  tliere  is  the  power  "to  fix  the  standard  of 
weights  and  measurea"  Practically,  this  has  never  been 
exercised  by  Congress ;  but  it  is  left  to  each  State  with- 
in its  own  jurisdiction.  On  the  other  hand,  there  is  a 
power,  belonging  to  the  same  group,  "  to  establish  uni- 
form laws  on  the  subject  of  bankruptcies  throughout 
the  United  States,"  which,  when  exercised  by  Congress, 
has  been  held  so  far  exclusive  as  to  avoid  at  once  all 
the  bankrupt  and  insolvent  laws  of  the  several  States. 

I  might  go  over  all  the  power's  of  Congress,  and  find 
constant  illustration  of  the  subject.  For  instance,  there 
is  the  power  "to  establish  an  uniform  rule  of  natu- 
ralization," on  which  Chief  Justice  Marshall  once  re- 
marked, "That  the  power  of  natui-alization  is  eaW-w- 
sively  in  Congress  does  not  seem  to  be,  and  certainly 
ought  not  to  be,  controverted."^  There  is  the  power  "to 
r^ulate  commerce  with  foreign  nations  and  among  the 
several  States,"  which  was  early  11  d  ly  th  '^u 
preme  Court  to  be  exclusive,  so  as  to  p  t  tl 

cise  of  any  part  of  it  by  the  States.^    Tl  th   j 

over  patents  and  copyrights,  which       al  a  led  a 

exclusive.  So  also  is  the  power  "t  leflne  anl  p  n  h 
piracies  and  felonies  committed  on  the  hi  et  anl 
offences  against  the  Law  of  Kation.        S    al  tl  at 

other  power,  "to  establish  post-ofti       and  it     al 
AH  these  powers,  as  in  the  case  of  the  pokier  ovea  the 
National  Militia,  have  been  exercised  by  Congress,  and 
even  if  not  absolutely  exclusive  in  original  character, 
have  become  so  by  exercise. 


■cibyGoogIc 


224        POWEES    OF    THE    STATE    OVER    THE   MILITIA  : 

Now,  Sir,  upon  what  ground  do  gentlemen  make  any 
discrimiaation  in  the  case  of  the  power  over  the  Na- 
tional Militia  1  I  know  of  none  which  seems  at  all 
tenable.  It  is  natural  that,  the  States  should  desire  to 
exercise  tliis  power,  since  it  was  so  important  to  them 
before  the  Union  y  hut  I  do  not  see  how  any  discrimina- 
tion can  be.  maintained  at  the  present  tima  Whatever 
may  have  been  the  original  importance  of  the  militia 
to  each  State,  yet,  when  the  National  Constitution  was 
formed,  and  Congress  exercised  the  power  delegated  to 
it  over  this  subject,  the  militia  of  the  8e\  eial  States  was 
absorbed  into  one  uniform  body,  organized,  armed,  and 
disciphned  as  the  National  Mditia  To  the  States  re- 
spectively, according  to  the  express  language  of  the  Con- 
stitution, was  left  "  the  appointment  of  the  officers,  and 
the  authority  of  tiainmg  the  militia  according  to  the 
disciphne  prescribed  by  Coi^ress"  To  this  may  be 
adiled  the  impbed  poiver  of  "govemmg"  them  when  m 
the  service  of  the  State  This  is  all  The  di'itmct  spe- 
cification of  certain  powers,  as  reserved  to  the  Stata'f,  ex- 
cludes the  States  fiom  the  exeicise  of  all  other  powers 
not  specified  or  clearly  imphed  In  other  words,  they 
are  excluded  from  all  powei  over  the  "  orgamzmg,  aim- 
ing, and  discipLming  the  mibtia,"  at  least  after  Coi^ess 
has  undertaken  to  enact  laws  for  this  purpose 

The  history  of  the  adoption  of  the  several  paits  of 
this  clause  in  the  National  Contention  lefiects  light 
upon  its  true  meamng  The  first  pait,  m  legaid  to 
orctanizmg,  aiming,  and  di-'cijdming  the  militia,  was 
passed  by  a  vote  of  mne  States  agamst  two ,  the  next, 
leseiving  the  appointment  of  officers  to  the  States,  alter 
an  ineffectual  attempt  to  amend  it  by  confining  the  ap- 
pointment to  officeis  undei  the  rank  of  general  ofELcers, 


■cibyGoogIc 


COLORED  COMPAHIES.  225 

was  passed  without  a  division ;  and  the  last,  reserving 
to  the  States  the  authority  to  train  the  militia  accord- 
ing to  the  discipline  prescribed  by  Congress,  was  passed 
by  a  vote  of  seven  States  against  four.^  It  seems,  then, 
that  there  was  strong  opposition  in  the  Convention, 
even  to  the  secondary  I'eservation  of  "  the  authority  of 
training  the  militia,"  But  this  power  is  not  reserved 
unqualifiedly.  The  States  are  to  train  the  militia  "  ac- 
cording to  the  discipliiie  fvescribed  by  Congress  " ;  not 
according  to  any  discipline  determined  by  the  States,  or 
by  the  States  concurrently  with  the  National  Govern- 
ment, but  absolutely  according  to  the,  discipline  pre- 
scrihed  hy  Congress,  —  nor  more,  nor  less :  thus  distinct- 
ly recognizing  the  essentially  exclusive  character  of  the 
legislation  of  Congress  on  this  subject. 

This  interpretation  derives  confirmation  from  the 
manner  in  which  the  militia  of  England  was  constituted 
or  organized  at  the  time  of  the  adoption  of  the  National 
Constitution.  To  the  crown  was  given  "  the  sole  right 
to  govern  and  command  them,"  though  they  were  "  offi- 
cered" by  the  Lord  Lieutenant,  the  Deputy  Lieutenants, 
and  other  principal  landholders  of  the  county.^  The  Com- 
mentaries of  Sir  William  Bkckstone,  from  which  this  de- 
scription is  drawn,  were  familiar  to  the  membeis  of  the 
Convention ;  and  it  is  reasonable  to  suppose,  that,  in  the 
distribution  of  powers  between  the  National  Government 
and  the  States,  on  this  subject,  the  peculiar  arrangement 
prevailing  in  the  mother  country  was  not  disregarded. 

If  it  should  be  said,  that  the  adoption  of  this  conclu- 
sion would  affect  the  character  of  many  laws  enacted 
by  States,  and  thus  fat  recognized  as  ancillary  to  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


226       POWERS   OF  THE  STATE   OVER  THE  MILITIA  ; 

National  Militia,  it  may  lae  replied,  that  the  possibility 
of  these  consec[ueiices  cannot  justly  influence  our  con- 
clusions on  a  question  which  must  be  determined  by  ac- 
knowledged principles  of  Constitutional  Law.  In  obe- 
dience to  these  same  principles,  the  Supreme  Court,  in 
the  case  of  Prigg  v.  Pennsylvania,  after  asserting  a  pow- 
er over  fugitive  slaves  which  is  controverted,  has  pro- 
ceeded to  annul  a  lai^e  number  of  statutes  in  different 
States.  Mr.  Justice  Wayne  in  this  case  said,  "that 
tlie  legislation  by  Congress  upon  the  provision,  as  the 
supreme  law  of  the  land,  excludes  all  State  legislation 
upon  tJte  same  subject,  —  and  that  no  State  can  pass  any 
law  or  regulation,  or  interpose  such  as  may  have  been  a 
law  or  regulation  when  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States  was  ratified,  to  superadd  to,  control,  qualify,  or 
impede  a  remedy  enacted  by  Congress  for  the  delivery 
of  fugitive  slaves  to  the  parties  to  whom  their  service 
or  labor  is  due."^  Without  the  sanction  of  any  express 
words  in  the  Constitution,  and  chiefly,  if  not  solely,  im- 
pressed by  the  importance  of  oonstilting  "  unity  of  pur- 
pose or  uniformity  of  operation"^  in  the  legislation  with 
r^ard  to  fugitive  slaves,  the  Court  assumed  a  power 
over  this  subject,  and  then,  as  a  natural  incident  to  this 
assumption,  excluded  the  States  from  all  sovereignty  in 
the  premises. 

If  this  rule  be  applicable  to  the  pretended  power  over 
fugitive  slaves,  it  is  still  more  applicable  to  the  power 
over  the  militia  which  nobody  questions.  Besides,  I 
know  of  no  power  which  so  absolutely  requires  what 
has  been  regarded  as  an  important  criterion,  "  unity  of 
purpose  or  imiformity  of  operation."  No  imiform  mili- 
tary organization  can  spring  from  opposite  or  inharmoni- 
1  I'rigE  V.  PennaylvaiilH,  16  Petei's,  638.  a  Ibid,,  624. 


■cibyGoogIc 


COLORED   COMPANIES,  227 

ous  systems,  and  all  systems  proceeding  from  different 
sources  are  liable  to  be  opposite  or  iDliarmonious. 

Bow,  Sir,  let  us  apply  tHis  reasoniug  to  the  matter  in 
hand.  In  Massachusetts  there  exists,  and  has  for  a 
loug  time  existed,  aii  anomalous  system,  familiarly  and 
loosely  described  as  the  Volunteer  Militia,  not  com- 
posed absolutely  of  those  enrolled  under  the  laws  of  the 
United  States,  hut  a  smaller,  moi-e  select,  and  pecu- 
liar body.  It  cannot  be  doubted  that  the  State,  by 
virtue  of  its  ^lice  powers  -within  its  own  borders,  has 
power  to  constitute  or  organize  a  body  of  voltmieers  to 
aid  in  enforcing  its  laws.  But  it  does  not  follow  that 
it  has  power  to  constitute  or  oi^anize  a  body  of  volun- 
teers who  shall  be  regarded  -as  part  of  the  National 
Militia.  And,  Sir,  I  make  bold  to  say  that  the  volun- 
teer Dulitia^ — I  prefer  to  call  it  the  volunteer  military 
companies  ^ — cannot  be  regarded  as  part  of  the  Na- 
tional Militia.  It  is  no  part  of  that  uniform  militia 
which  it  was  the  object  of  the  early  Act  of  Congress  to 
organize.  It  may  appear  to  be  part  of  this  system,  it 
may  affect  to  he,  but  I  pronounce  it  a  mistake  to  sup- 
pose that  it  is  so  in  any  just  constitutional  sense. 

As  a  local  system,  disconnected  from  the  National 
Militia,  and  not  in  any  way  constrained  hy  its  organi- 
zation, it  is  witliin  our  jurisdiction.  We  are  free  to 
declare  the  principles  which  shall  govern  it.  We  may 
declare,  that,  whatever  may  be  the  existing  law  of  the 
United  States  with  r^ard  to  its  enrolled  militia,  —  and 
with  this  I  propose  no  interference,  hecause  it  would  be 
futile,  —  I  say,  Massachusetts  may  proudly  declare  that 
in  her  own  volunteer  military  companies,  marshalled  un- 
der her  own  local  laws,  there  shall  be  no  distinction  of 
race  or  color. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  PACIFIC  RAILROAD  AND  THE  DECLARA- 
TION OF  INDEPENDENCE. 

Lecter  to  the  Mayor  of  Boston,  for  teb  Celebration  op 
Jolt  i,  1853. 

Boston,  July  1,  1S5S. 

DEAE  SIR,  —  It  will  not  "be  in  my  power  to  unite 
with  the  City  Council  of  Boston  in  the  approach- 
ing celebration  of  our  national  anniversary ;  but  I  beg 
to  assure  you  that  I  am  not  insensible  to  the  honor  of 
their  invitation. 

The  day  itself  comes  fuU  of  quickening  su^estions, 
■which  can  need  no  prompting  from  ma  And  yet,  with 
your  permission,  I  would  gladly  endeavor  to  associate  at 
this  time  one  special  aspiratitm  with  the  general  glad- 
ness.    Allow  me  to  propose  the  following  toast 

The  Hailroad  from  the  Atlantie  to  the  Pacific.  —  Trav- 
ersing a  whole  continent,  and  binding  tt^ther  two  oceans, 
this  mighty  thoroughfaro,  when  completed,  will  mark  an 
epoch  of  human  pr<^ega  second  only  to  that  of  our  Deck- 
ration  of  Independence,  May  the  day  soon,  come  !■ 
Believe  me,  dear  Sir,  faithfully  yours, 

CiiAELBs  Sumner. 
Hon.  Benjamin  Seaveb,  Mayor,  &c. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  REPRESESTATITE  SYSTEM,  AND  ITS 
PEOPER  BASIS. 

■PBECH  ON   THE   PbOPOSITION   TO  AMEND  THE  BaSIS  OP  TEE  HoUSB  01 
MASSACnnSETTS,  IN"  THE  CONTENTION  TO  HEVISl 

3TiruTi0N  OF  THAT  State,  July  7,  1853. 


MR.  PRESIDENT,—  If  the  question  under  consid- 
eratioa  were  less  important  in  its  bearings  or  less 
emlDarra3<'6'l  ly  conflicting  oiinions  I  sIiDuli  hesitate 
to  break  the  silence  which  I  hi\e  been  melined  to  pie 
serve  in  this  Co  mention  In  tiking  the  ^e  t  to  whi  h 
I  was  unex]^  eutedly  chosen  while  absent  troni  the  t  om 
monwealth  m  anothei  spl  ere  of  duty  I  felt  that  it 
would  be  becoming  m  me  and  tb^t  my  assoLi\te3 
here  would  retcgnize  the  proinety  ot  my  course  con 
aideimg  the  little  opportunity  I  hil  enj  yed  ot  late 
to  mil  e  myself  aequimted  with  the  sent  mcnts  ot  the 
people  on  proposed  chinges  especially  n  comiarisDn 
with  friends  to  whom  tins  mo^  ement  is  nii  nly  lue 
—  on  these  acuounts  as  also  oi  othei  account  I  lelt 
that  it  WDuld  be  becoming  m  me  to  mteifeie  as  I  ttle  as 
possible  with  these  debates  To  others  I  willmgly  left 
the  part  v,  hich  I  nu  ht  have  taken. 

Anl  now  while  I  think  that  tmce  oui  Kbcrs  began 
weeks  e\  en  m  ntl  s  have  passed  and  that  the  term  is 
alreah  rei,ched  when  according  to  tie  just  evpecta 
tiona  and  eimeat  desires  ot  many  they  si  oi  Id  1  e  closed 


■cibyGoogIc 


230 


THE   REPKESENTATIVE   SYSTEM, 


I  fed  that  acts  rather  than  words,  that  votes  rather 
thaji  speeches,  — at  least  such  as  I  might  hope  to  make, 
—  are  needed  here,  to  the  end  that  the  Convention,  sea- 
sonably and  effectively  completing  its  beneficent  work, 
may  itself  be  hailed  as  a  Great  Act  in  the  history  of  the 
Commonwealth. 

But  the  magnitude  of  this  question  justifies  debate ; 
and  allow  me  to  add,  that  the  State,  our  common  mother, 
may  feel  proud  of  the  ahihty,  the  eloquence,  and  the 
good  temper  with  which  it  has  thus  far  been  conducted. 
Gentlemen  have  addressed  the  Convention  in  a  manner 
which  would  grace  any  assembly  that  it  has  been  my 
fortune  to  know,  at  home  or  abroad.  Sir,  the  charac- 
ter of  these  proceedii^  gives  new  assurance  for  the 
future.  The  alarmist,  who  starts  at  every  suggestion  of 
change,  and  the  croaker,  who  augurs  constant  evil  from 
the  irresistible  tendency  of  events,  must  confess  that 
there  are  men  here  to  whose  intelligence  and  patriotr- 
ism,  under  God,  the  interests  of  our  beloved  Common- 
wealth may  well  be  intrusted.  Yea,  Sir,  Massachusetts 
is  safe.  Whatever  the  result  even  of  the  present  im- 
portant question,  whichsoever  scheme  of  representation 
may  he  adopted,  Massachusetts  will  continue  to  prosper 
as  in  times  past. 

In  the  course  of  human  history,  two  States,  small  in 
territoiy,  have  won  enviable  renown  by  genius  and  de- 
votion to  Freedom,  so  that  their  very  names  awaken 
echoes ;  I  refer  to  Athens  and  Scotland.     But  Athens, 

—  even  at  Salamis,  repelling  the  Persian  host,  or  after- 
wards, itt  the  golden  days  .of  Pericles,  —  and  Scotland, 
throughout  her  long  straggle  with  England,  down  to  the 
very  Act  of  Union  at  the  beginning  of  the  last  century, 

—  were  each  inferior,  in  population  and  wealth,  to  Mas- 


■cibyGooglc 


AND    ITS    PROPER    BASIS.  231 

sacimsetts  at  this  moment.  It  belongs  to  us,  according 
to  our  capacities,  to  see  that  this  comparison  does  not 
end  here.  Others  may  believe  that  our  duty  is  best 
accomplished  by  standing  still.  I  like  to  believe  that 
it  can  be  completely  done  only  by  constant,  incessant 
advance  in  aU  things,  — in  knowledge,  in  science,  in 
art,  and  lastly  in  government  itself,  destined  to  be  the 
bright  consummation,  on  earth,  of  all  knowle(%e,  all 
science,  and  all  art. 

In  framing  our  Constitution  anew,  we  encounter  a 
difficulty  which  at  its  original  formation,  in  1780,  per- 
plexed our  fathers,  —  which  perplexed  the  Convention 
of  1820,  —  which  with  its  perplexities  has  haunted  suc- 
cessive Legislatures  and  the  whole  people  down  to  this 
day,  —  and  which  now  perplexes  us.  This  difficulty 
occurs  ia  determinir^  the  Eepresentative  System,  and 
proceeds  mainly  from  the  coi-porate  claims  of  towns. 
From  an  early  period  m  the  State,  towns,  both  great 
and  small,  with  slight  exceptions,  have  sent  one  or  more 
representatives  to  the  Legislatura  In  primitive  days, 
when  towns  were  few  and  the  whole  population  was 
scanty,  this  arrangement  was  convenient  at  least,  if  not 
equitable.  But  now,  with  the  increased  number  of 
towns,  and  the  tmequal  distribution  of  a  large  popula- 
tion, it  has  become  inconvenient,  if  not  inequitable. 
The  existii^  system  does  not  work  well,  and  we  are 
summoned  to  reform  it. 

And  here,  Sir,  let  me  congratulate  the  Convention, 
that,  on  this  most  important  question,  transcending 
every  other,  all  of  us,  without  distinction  of  party,  are 
in  favor  of  reform.  AU  are  Eeformers,  The  existisig 
system  finds  no  advocate  on  this  floor.     Nobody  here 


■cibyGoogIc 


232  THE   REPRESlNrAnVE  SYSTEM, 

will  do  it  rev&rence.  If  the  call  of  the  Convention  were 
not  already  amply  vindicated,  if  there  were  doubt  any- 
where of  ite  expediency,  the  remarkatle  concurrence 
of  all  sides  in  condemning  the  existing  representative 
system  shows  that  we  have  not  come  together  without 
cause. 

The  orders  of  the  day  have  been  filled  with  various 
[Jans  to  meet  the  exigency.  Most  of  these  aimed  to 
preserve  the  corporate  representation  of  towns;  some  of 
them,  at  least  one  from  the  venerable  gentleman  from 
Taunton  [Mr.  Morton],  and  another  from  the  venerable 
gentleman  from  Boston  [Mr,  Hale],  favored  an  oppo- 
site system,  hitherto  untried  among  us,  and  proposed  to 
divide  the  State  into  districts.  The  question  has  been 
between  these  hostile  propositions ;  and  that  is  the  ques- 
tion which  I  propose  to  consider,  in  the  light  of  history 
and  abstract  principle,  as  also  with  reference  to  pres- 
ent exigencies.  I  shall  speak,  prst,  of  the  orighi  and 
nature  of  the  Eepresentative  System,  and  its  proper 
character  under  American  institutions ;  and,  seecmdhj,  I 
shall  endeavor  to  indicate  the  principles  which  may 
conduct  us  to  a  practical  conclusion  in  the  present  de- 
bate. Entering  upon  this  service  at  so  late  a  stage  of 
the  discussion,  I  feel  like  a  tardy  gleaner  in  a  well-trav- 
ersed field:  but  I  si 


I  BEGIN  with  the  Origin  and  Nature  of  the  Eepre- 
sentative System,  This  is  an  invention  of  modem 
times.  In  antiquity  there  were  republics  and  democra- 
cies, but  there  was  no  Eepresentative  System.  Eulers 
were  chosen  by  the  people,  as  in  many  Commonwealths ; 


■cibyGoogIc 


ASD  ITS  PBOPEE  BASIS.  233 

senators  were  designated  by  the  Iting  or  by  the  censors, 
as  in  Rome ;  ambassadors  or  legates  were  sent  to  a  Fed- 
eral Council,  as  to  the  Assembly  of  the  Amphictyons ; 
but  in  no  ancient  state  was  any  body  of  men  ever  con- 
stituted by  the  people  to  represent  them  in  the  admin- 
istration of  their  internal  affairs.  In  Athens,  the  people 
met  in  public  assembly,  and  directly  acted  for  them- 
selves on  all  questions,  foreign  or  domestic.  This  was 
possible  there,  as  the  State  was  small,  and  the  Assem- 
bly seldom  exceeded  five  thousand  citizens,  —  a  large 
town-meeting,  or  mass-meeting,  we  might  call  it,  — ■  not 
inaptly  termed  "that  fierce  democratie"  of  Athens. 

But  where  the  territory  was  extensive,  and  the  popu- 
lation scattered  and  numerous,  there  could  be  no  assem- 
bly of  the  whole  body  of  citizens.  To  meet  this  precise 
difficulty  the  Representative  System  was  devised,  By 
a  machinery  so  obvious  that  we  are  astonished  it  was 
not  employed  in  the  ancient  Commonwealths,  the  peo- 
ple, though  scattered  and  numerous,  are  gathered,  by 
their  chosen  representatives,  into  a  small  and  delibera- 
tive assembly,  where,  without  tumult  or  rashness,  they 
consider  and  determine  all  questions  which  concern 
them.  In  every  representative  body,  properly  consti- 
tuted, the  people  are  practically  present. 

Nothing  is  invented  and  perfected  at  the  same  time ; 
and  this  system  is  no  exception  to  the  rule.  In  Eng- 
land, where  it  reached  its  earliest  vigor,  it  has  been,  and 
still  is,  anomalous  in  character.  The  existing  divisions 
of  the  country,  composed  of  boroughs,  cities,  and  coim- 
ties,  were  summoned  by  the  king's  writ  to  send  repre- 
sentatives, with  little  regard  to  equahty  of  any  kind, 
whether  of  population,  taxation,  or  territory.  Their  ex- 
istence as  corporate  units  was  the  prevailing  title,     The 


■cibyGoogIc 


234  THE  EEPRESENTATIVE  SYSTEM, 

irregular  operation  of  the  system,  increasing  with  lapsG 
of  time,  provoked  a  cry  for  Parliamentary  Eefoi-m, 
which,  after  a  struggle  of  more  than  fifty  years,  ending 
in  a  debate  that  occupied  the  House  of  Commons  more 
than  fifty  days,  was  finally  carried ;  but,  though  many 
abuses  and  inec[ualities  were  removed,  yet  the  anoma- 
lous representation  by  counties,  cities,  and  boroi^hs  still 
continued.    And  this.  Sir,  is  the  English  system. 

Pass  now  to  the  American  system.  I  say  American 
system,  —  for  to  our  country  belongs  the  honor  of  iirst 
giving  to  the  world  the  idea  of  a  system  which,  dis- 
carding coi'ponite  representation,  founded  itself  abso- 
lutely on  equality.  Let  us  acknowledge  with  gratitude 
that  from  England  have  come  five  great  and  ever  mem- 
orable institutions,  by  which  Liberty  is  secured :  I 
mean  the  Trial  by  Jury,  —  the  writ  of  Haieas  Corpus,  — 
the  Representative  System,  —  the  Eules  and  Orders  of 
Debate,  —  and,  lastly,  that  benign  principle  which  pro- 
nounces that  its  air  is  too  pure  for  a  slam  to  breathe : 
perhaps  the  five  most  important  political  establisliments 
of  modem  times.  This  glory  cannot  be  taken  from  the 
mother  country.  But  America  has  added  to  the  Eepre- 
aentative  System  another  principle,  without  which  it  is 
incomplete,  and  which,  in  the  coiu^e  of  events,  is  des- 
tined, I  cannot  doubt,  to  find  acceptance  wherever  the 
item  is  employed ;  I  mean  tM  prin- 


Here  in  Massachusetts,  home  of  the  ideas  out  of 
which  sprang  the  Revolution,  this  principle  had  its  ear- 
liest expression.  And  it  is  not  a  little  curious  that  tliia 
very  expression  was  si^gested  by  the  two  evils  of  which 
we  now  complain,  —  namely,  a  practical  inequality  of 
representation,  and  a  too  numerous  House. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND   ITS  PROPER  BASIS.  235 

In  the  earliest  days  of  tlie  Colony,  while  the  number 
of  freemen  was  small  and  gathered  in  one  neighbor- 
hood, there  waa  no  occasion  for  any  representative  body. 
All  could  then  meet  in  public  assembly,  as  at  ancient 
Athens ;  in  fact,  they  did  so  meet,  and  in  this  way  dis- 
chai^ed  the  duties  of  legislation.  But  as  the  freemen 
became  scattered  and  numerous,  it  was  found  grievous 
to  compel  the  personal  attendance  of  the  whole  body, 
and,  as  a  substitute,  the  towns  were  empowered,  in  1634, 
to  assemble  in  GeneKd  Court  by  deputies.^  Here  was 
the  establishment  of  the  Representative  System  in  Mas- 
sachusetts, which  has  continued,  without  interruption, 
down  to  our  day.  The  size  of  the  House  and  the  rela^ 
tive  representation  of  towns  have  varied  at  different 
times ;  but  the  groat  principle  of  representation,  by 
which  a  substitute  is  provided  for  the  whole  body  of 
the  people,  has  constantly  been  preserved.  StOl  a  feel- 
ing has  long  prevailed  that  the  system  had  not  yet 
received  its  final  form,  while,  with  more  or  less  precis- 
ion, has  been  discerned  that  principle  of  eq^uahty  which 
is  essential  to  its  completeness. 

Among  the  acts  of  the  iirst  General  Court  of  the  Eev- 
olution  was  one  passed  in  the  siimmer  of  1775,  after 
■the  Battle  of  Bunker  HUl,  "  declaratory  of  the  right  of 
the  towns  and  districts  to  elect  and  depute  a  represen- 
tative or  representatives  to  serve  for  and  represent  them 
in  the  General  Court."  By  this  act  all  provisions  of 
previous  acts  denying  to  certain  towns  and  districts  the 
right  of  sending  a  representative  were  declared  null  and 
void,  and  every  town  containing  thirty  qualified  voters 

1  Hutchinson,  History  of  MassHchuaetts,  Vol.  I.  pp  30,  89.  Clmrters  and 
General  Lnws  of  tlie  Colony  mid  Fi'ovinoe  of  Mnssnchusatts  Bay,  Appen- 
dix, p.  713,  Records  of  the  Governor  eiiiI  Company  of  the  Mnssnohusetts 
Bfly,  Vol.  1.  pp.  118    118. 


■cibyGoogIc 


236  THE   EEPRESENTATIYE   SYSTEM, 

was  authorized  to  send  one.^  The  immediate  conse- 
quence was  the  two  evils  to  which  I  have  already 
referred,  —  namely,  iiieq^uality  of  representation,  and  a 
too  numerous  House :  but  the  whole  luimher  of  repre- 
sentatives which  aroused  the  complaints  of  that  day- 
was  three  himdred  and  five. 

These  grievances  were  the  occasion  of  a  Convention  of 
delegates  from  the  towns  of  Essex  County,  at  Ipswich, 
April  25,  1776,  where  was  adopted  a  Memorial,  after- 
wards presented  and  enforced  at  the  bar  of  tlie  House 
by  John  Lowell.  In  this  remarkable  document  occurs 
the  first  development,  if  not  the  first  proclamation,  of 
the  principle  of  equality  in  representation.  Here,  Sir, 
is  the  fountain  and  origin  of  an  idea  fuU  of  strength, 
beauty,  and  truth.  Listen  to  the  words  of  these  Revo- 
lutionary fathers. 

"  If  this  representation  is  equal,  it  is  perfect ;  as  far  as  it 
deviates  from  this  equality,  so  far  it  is  imperfect,  and  ap- 
pi-oaches  to  that  state  of  slavery ;  and  the  want  of  a  just 
weight  in  representation  is  an  evil  nearly  akin  to  being  to- 
tally destitute  of  it.  An  inequality  of  representation  has 
been  justly  esteemed  the  cause  which  has  in  a  great  degree 
sapped  the  foundation  of  the  once  admired,  but  now  totter- 
ing, fabric  of  the  British  Empire  ;  and  we  fear,  that,  if  a  dif- 
ferent mode  of  representation  from  the  present  is  not  adopted 
in  this  Colony,  our  Constitution  will  not  continue  to  that  late 
period  of  time  which  the  glowing  heart  ot  every  true  Ameri- 
can now  anticipates.  .... 

"  We  cannot  realize  that  your  Honors,  our  wise  political 
fathers,  have  adverted  to  the  present  inequality  of  represen- 
tation in  this  Colony,  to  the  growth  of  the  evil,  or  to  the 
fatal  consequences  which  will  probably  ensue  from  the  con- 
tinuance of  it. 
1  Charters  and  General  Laws  of  Massachusetta  Bay,  Appendix,  pp.  796,797. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND   ITS  PEOPER  BASIS.  237 

"  Each  town  and  district  in  the  Colony  is  by  some  late  reg- 
ulations permitted  to  send  one  representative  to  the  General 
Court,  if  such  town  or  district  consists  of  thirty  freeholders 
and  other  inhabitants  qualified  to  elect ;  if  of  one  hundred 
and  twenty,  to  send  two.  No  town  is  permitted  to  send  more 
than  two  except  the  t<wn  of  Boiton  which  may  send  four 
Theie  ire  some  towns  and  distiiUs  m  the  Colony  m  whit-h 
theie  aie  between  thirty  ind  tortj  fieehcldois  and  othei  m 
habitints  qiialihed  to  elect  onlj  there  aie  others  besides 
Barton  m  which  there  aie  more  than  fi^e  hnndied  The 
first  of  the^e  miy  send  one  representiti\e  the  litter  caa 
send  onlj  two  If  the^e  towns  as  to  prjpeity  ate  to  eadi 
other  in  the  same  respective  proptiitun  is  it  not  cleat  to 
a  mathematical  demonstration  that  the  same  nnmlei  of  in 
habitants  of  equal  property  m  the  one  town  ha^e  but  an 
eighth  part  of  the  weight  m  representation  with  the  othei  !  — 
and  with  what   coloiible  pretext?  we  would   decently  in 

Under  the  pre'isure  of  this  powerful  state  paper  the 
obnoMOus  law  w  as  lepeiled,  and  one  "  providing  for  a 
more  (.qual  repieaentafcion"  substituted;  but  the  evil 
was  only  partially  remedied  Then  followed  an  unsuc- 
cessful effort  to  make  a  Constitution  in  1777-8,  whieli 
failed  partly  through  dissatisfaction  with  its  disposal  of 
this  very  question.  The  County  of  Essex  was  again 
heard  in  another  document,  now  known  as  the  "  Essex 
Eesult,"  and  among  the  most  able  and  instructive  in 
our  history,  from  which  I  take  the  following  important 
words. 

"  The  rights  of  representation  should  be  so  equally  and 
impartially  distributed,  that  the  representatives  should  have 
the  same  views  and  interests  with  the  people  at  large.    They 

1  From  the  original  MS.  [n  the  Massnclinsetta  Archives,  Vol  166. 


■cibyGoogIc 


238  THE  KEPRESENTATIVE   SYSTEM, 

should  think,  feel,  aad  act  like  them,  and,  in  fine,  should  he 
an  exact  miniature  of  their  constitueats.  They  should  be, 
if  we  may  use  the  expression,  the  whole  body  politic,  with 
aD  its  property,  rights,  and  privileges  reduced  to  a  smaller 
scale,  (veri/  part  being  dimims/ied  in  Jitst  proporticai.  To  pur- 
sue the  metaphor,  if,  in  adjusting  the  representation  of  free- 
men, fljsj/  len  are  reduced  into  one,  all  the  other  teiis  should  be 
alike  reduced  ;  or,  if  any  hundred  shoald  be  reduced  to  one,  all 
the  other  hundreds  should  have  Just  the  same  reduction."  ^ 

Mark  -well  these  worda.  Here  is  the  Eule  of  Three, 
for  the  first  time  in  history,  applied  to  representation. 
This,  Sir,  is  not  the  English  system.  I  call  it,  with 
pride,  the  American  system. 

In  another  place  the  document  proceeds  as  follows. 

"  The  rights  of  representation  should  also  be  held  sacred 
and  inviolable,  and  for  this  purpose  representation  should 
be  fixed  upon  known  and  easy  principles ;  and  the  Constitu- 
tion should  make  provision  that  recourse  should  constantly 
be  had  to  those  principles  within  a  very  smalt  period  of 
years,  to  rectify  the  errors  that  will  creep  in  through  lapse 
of  time  or  alteration  of  situations."  ^ 

Then,  distinctly,  it  proposes  a  system  of  districts,  in 
words  which  I  quote. 

"  In  forming  the  first  body  of  legislators,  let  regard  be  had 
only  to  the  representation  of  persons,  not  of  property.  This 
body  we  call  the  House  of  Representatives.  Ascertain  the 
number  of  repi-esentatives.     It  ought  not  to  be  so  large  as  will 

1  Result  of  tlie  Convention  of  Delegates  holden  at  Ipswich,  in  the  Connty 
of  Eases,  mho  were  deputed  (o  take  into  Consideration  the  Constitution  and 
Form  of  Goveniment  proposed  by  the  Convention  of  the  Stats  of  Mnssaoha- 
setts  Bay,  ( Newburypoct,  1T78,)  pp.  20,  30.  See  also  Memoir  of  Theopiiiius 
Parsons,  by  his  Son,  Appendix,  pp.  369-402,  where  tliia  rftnuirltable  paper 
wili  be  found. 

3  Resuit,  p.  33. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND  ITS   PROPER  BASIS.  239 

induce  an  enormous  expense  to  Government,  tior  too  unwieldy 
to  deliberate  with  coolness  and  attention,  nor  so  small  as  to 
be  unacquainted  with  the  situation  and  circumstances  of  the 
State-  One  hundred  will  bo  large  enough,  and  perhaps  it 
may  be  too  large.  We  are  persuaded  that  any  number  of  men 
eveeeding  that  caimot  do  business  with  such  cspedition  and 
piopriitj  as  a  smaller  number  uould.  However,  let  that  at 
present  be  con&idered  as  the  number.  Let  us  have  the 
number  of  freemen  m  tho  several  counties  in  the  State,  and 
let  these  lepiesentatives  be  apportioned  among  the  respec- 
tive counties  m  piopoitionto  their  numher  of  freemen 

As  we  haie  the  numbei  of  freemen  in  the  county,  and  the 
number  of  county  representatives,  by  dividing  the  greater 
by  the  less  we  ha\e  the  number  of  freemen  entitled  to 
send  one  lepiescntative  Then  add  as  many  adjoining  towns 
together  as  contam  that  number  of  freemen,  or  as  near  as 
ma>  be,  and  M  those  toionf  fot  m  one  district,  and  proceed  in 
tins  manner  thiough  the  county."^ 

Mb  Hi-clett,  foi  Wilhrahim  (interrupting).  Will  the 
gentleman  state  who  was  the  author  of  that  Essex  paper  1 

Mr,  Sumner.  Theophilus  Parsons  is  the  reputed  author 
of  the  document  kno^vn  as  the  "  Essex  Result." 

Mb.  Hallett.  Yes,  Sir,  it  was  Theophilus  Parsons  who 
was  the  author  of  that,  and  John  Lowell  of  the  other;  and 
good  old  Tory  doctrines  they  are. 

Mr.  Sdmner.  If  these  be  Tory  doctrines,  I  must  think 
well  of  Toryism. 

Sir,  notwithstanding  these  appeals,  sustained  with 
unsurpassed  ability,  the  American  system  failed  to  be 
adopted  in  the  Constitution  of  1780.  The  anomalous 
English  system  was  atUl  continued ;  hut,  as  if  to  cover 
the  departure  from  principle,  it  was  twice  declared  that 

1  Result,  pp.  49  -  61. 


■cibyGoogIc 


240  THE  EIPEESENTATIVE   SYSTEM, 

the  representation  of  the  people  sliould  be  "founded 
upon  the  prmciple  of  equality,"  This  declaration  still 
continues  as  our  guide,  while  the  iri'egular  operation 
of  the  existiug  system,  with  its  inequalities  and  large 
numbers,  is  a  beacon  of  warning. 

Following  closely  upon  tliese  efforts  in  Massachu- 
setts, this  principle  found  an  illustrious  advocate  in 
Thomas  Jeflersou.  In  his  "  Kotes  on  Virginia,"  written 
in  1781,  he  sharply  exposes  the  inequalities  of  repre- 
sentation ;  1  and  a  short  time  afterwards,  when  the  vic- 
tory at  Yorktown  bad  rescued  Vi^inia  from  invasion 
and  secured  the  independence  of  the  United  Colonies, 
he  prepared  the  draught  of  a  Constitution  for  his  native 
State,  which,  disowning  the  English  system,  and  recog- 
nizing the  very  principle  that  liad  failed  in  Massachu- 
setts, expressly  provided  that  "the  number  of  delegates 
which  each  county  may  send  shall  be  in  proportion  to 
tlie  wimber  of  its  qualified  electors ;  and  the  whole  num- 
ber of  del^ates  for  the  State  shall  be  so  proportioned  to 
the  whole  number  of  qualified  electors  in  it,  that  they 
sliaU  never  exceed  three  hundred  nor  be  fewer  than 
one  hundred.  ....  If  any  county  he  reduced  in  its  qual- 
ified electors  below  the  number  authorized  to  send  one 
delegate,  let  it  be  annexed  to  some  adjoining  county."^ 
This  proposition,  which  is  substantially  the  Eole  of 
Three,  did  not  find  favor  in  Vit^nia,  which  State,  like 
Massachusetts,  was  not  yet  prepared  for  such  a  charter 
of  electoral  equality ;  but  it  still  stands  as  a  monument 
at  once  of  its  author  and  of  the  true  system  of  repre- 
sentation. 

The  American  system,  though  first  showing  itself  in 

1  Query  XIII. 

3  Notes  on  V[rg;nifl,  Appendix,  No.  IL :  Works,  Vol.  Vlll.,  p.  413. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND   ITS  PROPER  BA^S.  ^^^J- 

Easaacliusetta  and  Virginia,  found  its  earliesb  practical 
exemplification  a  few  years  later  in  tlie  Constitution  of 
the  United  States.  By  the  Articles  of  Confederation 
each  State  was  entitled  to  send  to  Congress  not  less 
than  two  nor  more  than  seven  representatives,  and  in 
the  detei-mination  of  questions  each  State  had  one  vote 
only.  This  plan  was  rejected  hy  the  framers  of  tlie  new 
Constitution,  and  another  was  adopted,  till  then  untried 
in  the  history  of  the  world.  It  was  declared  that  "  rep- 
resentatives and  direct  taxes  shaU  be  apfortwrni  amoi^ 
the  several  States  which  may  he  included  within  this 
Union  accm-Avruj  to  their  respective  nmnhers":  not  ac- 
cording to  property,  not  according  to  territory,  not  ac- 
cording to  any  corporate  rights,  hd  aceordiiig  to  tlieir 
reactive  nmiibcrs.  And  this  system  has  continued 
down  t-o  our  day,  and  -n-ill  continue  immortal  as  the 
Union  itaelf.  Here  is  the  Rule  of  Three  actually  in- 
corporated into  the  Representative  System  of  the  United 
States. 

An  attempt  has  been  made  to  render  this  system 
odious,  or  at  least  (questionable,  by  chai^ng  upon  it 
something  of  the  excesses  of  the  great  Trench  Eevolu- 
tion.  Even  if  this  rule  had  prevailed  at  that  time  in 
France,  it  would  be  bold  to  charge  upon  it  any  such 
consequences.  But  it  is  a  mistake  to  suppose  that  it 
was  then  adopted  in  tlmt  country.  The  republican  Con- 
stitution of  1791  was  not  founded  upon  numbers  only, 
hut  upon  numbers,  territory,  and  taxation  combined,  — 
a  mixed  system,  which  excluded  the  true  idea  of  per- 
sonal equality.  At  the  peaceful,  almost  bloodless,  Revo- 
lution of  1848,  under  the  lead  of  Lamartine,  a  National 
Assembly  was  convened  on  the  simple  basis  of  popu- 
lation, and  one  representative  was  allowed  for  eveiy 


■cibyGoogIc 


242  THE   EEPEESENTATIVE   SYSTEM, 

forty  thousand  inliaLitante.  Here^  indeed,  is  tlie  Evile  of 
Three ;  but  the  idea  originally  came  from  our  country. 

Mr,  Hallbtt.  Will  the  gentleman  for  Marshfield  allow 
me  to  KiEike  one  more  inquiry  1 

Mr,  Somnbb.     Certainly. 

Mr.  Hallbtt.  Do  I  understand  the  gentleman  to  say 
that  the  Rule  of  Three  was  applied  to  representation  in  the 
United  States  1 

Mr.  Sumseb.  I  mcaa  to  Bay  that  the  representation  in 
the  lower  House  of  Congress  was  apportioned  according  to 
numbers ;  and  this  is  the  Rule  of  Three. 

A  practical  question  arises  here,  whether  this  rule 
should  be  applied  to  the  whole  body  of  population,  in- 
cluding women,  children,  and  unnaturalized  foreigners, 
or  to  those  only  "who  exercise  the  electoral  franchise,  — 
in  other  words,  to  voters.  It  is  probable  that  the  rule 
would  produce  nearly  similar  results  in  both  cases,  as 
voters,  except  in  few  places,  would  bear  a  uniform 
proportion  to  the  whole  population.  But  it  is  easy  to 
determine  what  tho  principle  of  the  Representative  Sys- 
tem requires.  Since  its  object  is  to  provide  a  practi- 
cal substitute  for  meetings  of  the  people,  it  should  be 
founded,  in  just  proportion,  on  the  numbers  of  those  who, 
according  to  our  Constitution,  can  take  part  in  those 
meetings,  —  that  is,  upon  the  qualified  voters.  The  rep- 
resentative body  should  be  a  miniature  or  abridgment 
of  the  electoral  body,— -in  other  words,  of  those  allowed 
to  participate  in  public  aifairs.  If  this  conclusion  needs 
authority,  it  may  be  found  in  the  words  of  Mr.  Madi- 
son, in  the  Debates  on  the  National  Constitution.  "  It 
has  been  very  properly  observed,"  he  says,  "  that  rep- 
resentation is  an  expedient  by  which  the  meeting  of 
tlie  people  tliemselves  is  rendered  unneeessaiy,  and  that 


■cibyGoogIc 


AXD   ITS    PltOPER   BASIS.  ^4^ 

the,  representatives  ought,  therefore,  to  hear  a  proportion 
to  the  votes  which  their  eanstit-umis,  if  cowaened,  would 
respectively  have."^ 

The  Eule  of  Three,  then,  applied  to  voters,  seems  to 
,  me  sound ;  but  whether  applied  to  voters  or  population, 
it  is  the  true  rule  of  representation,  and  stands  on  irre- 
versible principles.  In  my  view,  it  commends  itseK  to 
the  natural  reason  so  obviously,  so  instinctively,  tliat 
I  do  not  feel  disposed  to  dwell  upon  it.  But  since  it 
ia  called  in  question,  I  shall  be  excused  for  saying  a  few 
words  in  its  behalf.  Its  advantag-es  present  themselves 
in  several  aspects. 

First.  I  put  in  the  front  its  constant  and  equal  oper- 
ation throughout  the  Commonwealth.  Under  it,  every 
man  will  have  a  representative  each  year,  and  every 
man  wiU.  have  the  same  representative  power  as  every 
other  man.  In  this  respect  it  recognizes  a  darling  idea 
of  our  institutions,  which  cannot  be  disowned  witliout 
weakening  their  foundations.  It  gives  to  the  great 
principle  of  human  equality  a  new  expansion  and  ap- 
plication. It  makes  all  men,  in  the  enjoyment  of  the 
electoral  francliiae,  whatever  their  diversities  of  intelli- 
gence, education,  or  wealth,  or  wheresoever  they  may 
be  within  the  borders  of  the  Commonwealth,  whether 
in  small  town  or  in  populous  city,  absolutely  equal  at 
the  ballot-box, 

I  know  that  there  are  persons.  Sir,  who  do  not  hesi- 
tate to  assail  the  whole  doctrine  of  the  eqiiality  of  men, 
as  enunciated  in  our  Declaration  of  Independence  and 
in  our  Bill  of  Rights.  In  this  work  two  eminent  states- 
men of  our  own  country  and  Ei^daud  have  led  the 
way.^     But  it  seems  to  me,  that,  if  they  had  chosen  to 


■cibyGoogIc 


244  THE  KEPEESENTATIVE   SYSTEM, 

compreHeiid  the  meaning  of  the  principle,  much,  if  not 
all,  of  their  objection  would  have  been  removed.  Very 
plain  it  is  that  men.  are  not  bom  equal  in  physical 
strength  or  in  mental  capacity,  in  beauty  of  form  or 
health  of  body.  This  is  apparent  to  all,  and  the  differ- 
ence increases  with  years.  Diversity  or  inequality  in 
these  respects  is  the  law  of  creation.  But  as  God  is  no 
respecter  of  persons,  and  as  all  are  equal  in  his  sight, 
whether  rich  or  poor,  whether  dwellera  in  cities  or  in 
fields,  so  are  all  equal  in  natural  rights;  and  it  is  an 
absurd  declamation  —  of  which  no  gentleman  in  this 
Convention  is  guilty  —  to  adduce,  in  argument  against 
them,  the  physical  or  mental  inequalities  by  which  men 
are  characterized.  Now  I  am  not  prepared  to  class  the 
electoral  franchise  among  inherent,  natiual  rights,  com- 
mon to  the  whole  human  family,  without  distinction  of 
age,  sex,  or  residence ;  but  I  do  say,  that  from  the  equal- 
ity of  men,  which  we  so  proudly  proclaim,  we  derive  a 
just  rule  for  its  exercisa  Por  myself,  I  accept  this 
principle,  and,  just  so  far  and  just  so  soon  as  possible,  I 
would  be  guided  by  it  in  the  system  of  li 
But  there  are  other  reasons  still 

Secondly.  The  Rule  ot  Three,  as  applied  to  r 
tation,  is  commended  by  its  simplicity.  It  supersedes 
ail  the  painful  calculations  to  which  we  have  been 
driven,  the  long  agony  of  mathematics,  as  it  was  called 
by  my  friend  over  the  way  [  Mr  Giles],  and  is  as  easy 
in  application  as  it  is  just. 

Thirdly.  This  rule  is  founded  in  Nature,  and  not  in 
Art,  —  on  natural  bodies,  and  not  on  artificial  bodies, — 
on  men,  and  not  on  corporations,^  on  souls,  and  not  on 
petty  gec^raphical  lines.  On  Uiis  aocount  it  may  be 
called  a  natural  rule,  and,  when  once  established,  will 


■cibyGoogIc 


AUD    ITS    TKOPEK   BASIS.  245 

become  fixed  and  permanent,  beyond  all  change  or  de- 
sire of  change. 

And,  fonriMy,  this  rule  removes,  to  every  possible 
extent,  those  opportunities  of  political  partiality  and 
calculation,  in  the  adjustment  of  representation,  which 
are  naturally  incident  to  any  departure  from  precise 
rule.  It  was  beautifully  said  of  Law  by  the  greatest  in- 
tellect of  Antiquity,  that  it  is  mind  withatd  passion ;  and 
this  very  definition  I  would  extend  to  a  rule  which, 
with  little  intervention  from  human  will,  is  graduated 
by  number's,  passionless  as  law  itself  in  the  conception 
of  Aristotle.  The  object  of  free  institutions  is  to  with- 
draw all  concerns  of  State,  so  far  as  practicable,  from 
human  discretion,  and  place  them  under  the  sliield  of 
human  principles,  to  tlie  end,  according  to  the  words 
of  our  Constitution,  that  there  may  be  "  a  government  of 
laws,  and  not  of  men."  But,  just  in  proportion  as  we 
depart  from  precise  rule,  it  becomes  a  government  of 
men,  and  not  of  laws. 

Such  considerations  as  these,  thus  briefly  expressed, 
seem  to  vindicate  this  rule  of  representation.  But  I 
would  not  forget  the  ailments  adduced  against  it. 
These  assume  two  distinct  forms:  one  founded  on  the 
character  of  our  towns  and  the  importance  of  preserving 
their  influence ;  the  other  founded  ou  the  alleged  neces- 
sity of  counteracting  the  centralization  of  power  in  the 
cities.     Now  of  these  in  their  order. 

And,  first,  of  the  importance  of  preserving  our  towns. 
Sir,  I  yield  to  no  man  in  appreciation  of  the  good  done 
by  these  free  municipalities.  The  able  member  for 
Erving  [Mr.  Griswold],  who  began  this  debate,  the 
eloquent  member  for  Berlin  [Mr.  Boutwell],  and  my 
excellent  friend  of  many  years,  the  accomplished  mem- 


■cibyGooglc 


246  THE    EBPIiESESTATIVE    SYSTEM, 

ber  for  Manchester  [Mr.  Daka],  in  the  masterly  speeches 
vhich  they  have  addressed  to  the  Convention,  attributed 
110  good  infiueuoe  to  the  towns  which  I  do  not  recog- 
nise also.  "With  them  I  agree,  cordially,  that  the  towns 
of  Massachusetts,  like  the  municipalities  of  Switzerland, 
have  been  schools  and  niuBeries  of  freedom,  —  and  that 
in  these  small  bodies  men  were  early  discipHned  in 
those  primal  duties  of  citizenship,  widch,  on  a  grander 
scale,  are  made  the  foundation  of  our  whole  pohtical 
fabric.  But  I  cannot  go  so  far  as  to  attribute  this  re- 
markable influence  to  the  assumed  fact,  that  each  town 
by  itself  was  entitled  to  a  representative  in  the  legisla- 
tive body.  At  the  time  of  the  Eevolution  this  was  the 
prerogative  of  most  towns,  though  not  of  all ;  but  it  can- 
not be  regarded  as  the  distinctive,  essential,  life-giving 
attribute ;  at  moat,  it  was  only  an  incident. 

Sir,  the  true  gloiy  of  the  towns  then  was,  that  they 
were  organized  on  the  principle  of  self-government,  at  a 
time  when  that  principle  was  not  generally  recognized,  — 
that  each  town  by  itself  was  a  little  republic,  where  the 
whole  body  of  freemen  were  V  oters  Vi  th  powers  of  locU 
legislation,  taxation,  and  admmistration  and  especially 
with  power  to  choose  their  own  hcid  md  all  luloili 
nate  magistrates.  The  bjrouL,hs  of  En^luid  ha^e  pos 
sessed  the  power  to  send  a  member  —  often  two  mem 
hers  —  to  Parhament ;  but  this  has  not  saved  them 
from  corruption ;  nor  has  tny  person  attributed  to  them 
though  in  the  enjoyment  of  this  fianchise  the  mflu 
ence  which  has  proceeded  fum  oui  mun  cipabtie's 
The  reason  is  obvious.  The-y  were  oiganized  under 
charters  from  the  crown  bj  wh  ch  local  government 
was  vested,  not  in  the  whole  body  oi  fteemeu  but  m 
small  councils,  or  select  chsses   oiiginally  nonunated 


■cibyGoogIc 


AKD    ITS    PEOPER   BASIS.  247 

ly  the  crown,  and  ever  afterwards  renewing  themaelvea. 
No  such  abuse  prevailed  in  our  municipalities ;  aud 
this  political  health  at  home.  Sir,  and  not  the  incident 
of  exclusive  representation  in  a  distant  Legislature,  has 
heen  the  secret  of  their  strength.     I  would  cherish  it 

This  brings  me,  in  the  next  place,  to  the  objection 
founded  on  centralization  of  power  in  the  cities.  It  is 
said  that  wealth,  business,  population,  and  talent,  in 
multitudinous  forms,  all  tend  to  the  cities,  and  that  the 
excessive  influence  of  this  concentrated  mass,  quickened 
by  an  active  press,  by  facilities  of  concert,  and  by  social 
appliances,  ought  to  be  counterbalanced  by  allotment  to 
the  towns  of  representative  weight  beyond  their  pro- 
portion of  numbers.  liTow,  Sir,  while  confessing  and  re- 
gretting the  present  predominance  of  the  cities,  I  must 
be  permitted  to  question  the  propriety  of  the  propcsed 
remedy.  And  here,  differing  in  some  respects  from 
friends  on  both  sides,  I  make  an  appeal  for  candid 
judgment  of  what  I  shall  candidly  say. 

Let  us  deal  fairly  by  the  cities.  No  Student  of 
history  can  fail  to  perceive  that  they  have  performed 
different  parts  at  different  st^es  of  the  world.  In  An- 
tiquity, they  were  the  acknowle(%ed  centres  of  power, 
often  of  tyranny.  In  the  Middle  Ages,  they  became  the 
home  of  freedom,  and  the  bridle  to  feudalism.  For  this 
service  they  should  be  gratefully  remembered.  And 
now  there  is  another  change.  The  armed  feudalism  is 
overthrown ;  but  it  is  impossible  not  to  see  that  it  has 
yielded  to  a  connnercial  feudalism,  whose  seat  is  in  the 
cities,  and  which,  in  its  way,  is  hardly  less  selfish  and 
exacting  than  the  feudalism  of  the  iron  hand.  My 
friend,  the  member  for  Manchester  [Mr,  DanaJ  was 


■cibyGoogIc 


248  THE  REPEESENTATIVE   SYSTEM, 

clearly  riglit,  when  lie  said  that  the  Boston  of  to-day  is 
not  the  Boston  of  our  fathers.  Let  me  he  understood. 
I  malce  no  impeachment  of  individuals,  but  simply  in- 
dicate those  combined  influences  proceeding  from  the 
potent  Spirit  of  Trade,  which,  though  unlike  that  Spirit 
of  the  Lord  where  is  Liberty,  is  not  inconsistent  with 
the  most  enlarged  munificence.  I  think,  while  confess- 
ing the  abounding  charities  of  the  rich  men  whose 
eulogy  we  havo  heard  more  than  once  in  this  debate, 
it  must  be  admitted  that  those  pure  principles  which 
are  the  breath  of  the  Kepublic  now  find  their  truest 
atmosphere  in  calm  retreats,  away  from  the  strife  of 
gain  and  the  hot  pavements  of  crowded  streets.  Sir,  it 
is  not  only  when  we  look  upon  the  fields,  hills,  and 
valleys,  clad  in  verdure,  and  shining  with  silver  lake 
or  rivulet,  that  we  are  ready  to  exclaim, — 

"  God  raade  tlie  conntry,  and  man  made  the  town." 

But,  Sir,  while  maintaining  these  opinions,  I  cannot 
admit  the  ai^ument,  that  the  centrahzed  power  of  the 
cities  may  be  counteracted  by  degrading  them  in  the 
scale  of  representation.  This  cannot  be  purposely  done, 
without  departing  irom  fundamental  principles,  and 
overthrowing  the  presiding  doctrine  of  personal  equal- 
ity. Cities  are  but  congregations  of  men ;  and  men  ex- 
ert influence  in  various  ways, — by  the  accident  of  po- 
sition, the  accident  of  intelligence,  the  accident  of  prop- 
erty, the  accident  of  birth,  and,  kstly,  by  the  vote.  It 
is  the  vote  only  which  is  not  an  accident ;  and  it  should 
be  the  boast  of  Massachusetts,  that  all  men,  whatever 
their  accidents,  are  equal  in  their  votes. 

Here  the  hammer  of  ttia  President  Ml,  as  the  hour  expirerl ;  but,  hy 
nnanimoua  consent,  Mr,  Sumner  proceeded. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND    ITS    PROPER   BASIS.  249 

Tlie  idea  of  property  aa  a  check  upon  iiumljers,  -wliich 
on  a  former  occasion  found  such  favor  in  this  hall,  is 
now  rejected  in  the  adjustment  of  our  Eept'eaentative 
System.  And,  Sir,  I  venture  to  predict  that  the  propo- 
sition, newly  broached  in  this  Commonwealth,  to  re- 
strain the  cities  by  curtailment  of  their  just  representa- 
tive power,  will  hereafter  be  as  little  regarded. 


II. 

Mr.  President, — Such  is  what  I  have  to  say  on  the 
history  and  principles  of  the  Eepresentative  System, 
■particularly  in  the  light  of  American  institutions ;  and 
this  brings  me  to  the  practical  questioTi  at  this  moment. 
■I  cannot  doubt  that  the  District  System,  as  it  is  gen- 
erally called,  whereby  the  representative  power  will  be 
distributed  in  just  proportion,  according  to  the  Eule 
of  Three,  among  the  voters  of  the  Commonwealth,  is 
the  true  system,  destined  at  no  distant  day  to  prevail. 
And  gladly  would  I  see  this  Convention  hasten  the 
day  by  presenting  it  to  the  people  for  adoption  in  the 
oi^nic  law.  To  this  end  I  have  striven  by  my  votes. 
But,  Sir,  I  cannot  forget  what  has  ptLssed.  The  votes 
already  taken  show  that  the  Convention  is  not  prepared 
for  this  radical  change ;  and  I  am  assured  by  gentlemen 
more  familiar  with  public  sentiment  than  I  can  pretend 
to  be,  tliat  the  people  are  not  yet  prepared  for  it. 

Thus  we  are  brought  to  the  position  occupied  succes- 
sively by  the  Conventions  of  1780  and  1820,  each  of 
wliich,  though  containing  warm  partisans  of  the  District 
System,  shrank  from  its  adoption — as  in  Virginia,  the 
early  recommendation  of  Jefferson,  and  hia  vehement 


■cibyGoogIc 


250  THE   KErRESENTATJVE    SYSTEM, 

support  at  a  later  day,  have  been  powerless  to  produce 
this  important  amendment.  John  Lowell,  who  appeared 
at  the  bar  of  the  Massachusetts  Legislature  in  1776  to 
vindicate  the  principle  of  equality  in  representation, 
and  Theophilus  Parsons,  author  of  the  powerful  tract 
which  proposed  to  found  the  Kepresentative  System  on 
the  Eule  of  Three,  were  both  members  of  the  first  Con- 
vention,—  and  I  know  not  if  the  District  System  has 
since  had  any  abler  defenders.  To  these  I  might  add 
the  great  name  of  John  Adams,  who  early  pleaded  for 
equahty  of  representation,  and  declared,  in  words  adopted 
by  the  Essex  Convention,  that  the  Eepresentative  As- 
sembly should  be  "  an  exact  portrait  in  miniature  of  the 
people  at  large."^  In  the  Convention  of  1820,  the  Dis- 
trict System  was  cherished  and  openly  extolled  by  a 
distinguished  jurist,  at  that  time  a  Justice  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States,  —  Joseph  Story,  — 
whose  present  fame  gives  additional  importance  to  his 
opinions.  And  yet  the  desire  of  these  men  failed.  The 
corporate  representation  of  towns  was  preserved,  and 
the  District  System  pronounced  impracticable .  In 
the  Address  put  forth  by  the  Convention  of  1780,  and 
s^ed  by  its  President,  James  Bowdoin,  these  words 
may  be  found:  — 

"You  wUl  observe  that  we  have  resolved  that  represen- 
tation ought  to  be  founded  on  the  prlnciplo  of  Equality  ; 
but  it  cannot  be  understood  thereby  that  each  town  in  the 
Commonwealth  shall  have  weight  and  importance  in  a  just 
proportion  to  its  numbers  and  property.  An  exact  repre- 
Bentation  would  be  unpracticablo,  even  in  a  system  of  gov- 
emment  arising  from  the  state  of  Nature,  and  much  more 

'  Thoughts  on  Govemraant!  Works,  Vol.  IV.  pp.  195,  206.  Essex  BsBiilt, 
p.  SB. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND   ITS  PROPER  BASIS.  251 

80  in  a  State  already  divided  into  nearly  three  hundred 
corporations."  ' 

The  Convention  seem  tn  have  recognized  the  theo- 
retic fitness  of. an  "exact  representation,"  but  did  not 
regard  it  as  feasible  in  a  State  already  divided  into 
nearly  three  htrndred  corporations.  In  the  Convention 
of  1820,  Joseph  Story,  who  lias  been  quoted  by  my  elo- 
quent friend  [Mr.  Choate],  used  language  which,  though 
not  so  strong  as  that  of  the  early  Address,  has  the  same 
result. 

"  In  the  Select  Comnaittee,  I  was  in  favor  of  a  plan  of  rep- 
resentation in  the  House  founded  on  population,  as  the  most 
just  and  equal  in  its  operation.  I  still  retain  that  opinion 
There  were  serious  objections  against  this  system,  and  it 
was  believed  by  others  that  the  towns  could  not  be  brought 
t  ttv'l'pth         potp'dg     of  representa- 

t  hhhlb  jyd      Ig      d  so  intimately 

t   1  w  tl    th       pnd        d  th  u-      t       t       I  felt  con- 
t     It  to  J    Id  up  a  favor- 

gh  t    k     w  that,  in  any 
th  t    b       elded  up  on 

1      mp    m       1       t  the  oii^m  of 
d  th     q      t  \er  was  and 

1         h  t        b    1  t  Ij  1     t  1    t  wh  t  IS  rehtivelj 
wsejt        Ipltii  tlttd,  tbeiefoie, 

t        pportth    pi        fth    SI    tCm     tt  one  that,  on 

th    wl    1  th    be  t  th  t        d  t  rcumstanees, 

eould  be  obtained."  * 

Sir,  I  am  not  insensible  to  these  considerations,  or 
to  the  authority  of  these  examples.     A  division  of  the 

1  .loomiil  of  the  Convmtion,  p.  219. 

3  Debnt«s,  etc.,  in  the  Coovention  to  revise  the  Constitution  of  Maaaaohu- 
Betts,  16aO-ai,  p.  ise  e.    Story's  Miaceilaiieoua  Writings,  p.  618. 


■t      d  tl     f 

t    pi  n.     I  h 
1      t          f  g 
dl     1         C        ] 

wth 
1      d 

1    t 

;db,Googlc 


252  THE   REPKESENTATIVE  SYSTEM, 

State  into  districta  would  be  a  change,  in  conformity 
with  ahatra^it  principles,  which  would  interfere  with  ex- 
isting opinions,  habitudes,  and  prejudices  of  the  towns, 
aU  of  which  must  be  respected.  A  cliauge  so  impottant 
in  character  cannot  be  aflvantageously  made,  unless 
supported  by  tlie  permanent  feelings  and  convictions  of 
the  people.  Institutions  are  formed  from.  wUMn,  not 
from,  without.  They  spring  from  custom  and  popular 
faith,  silently  operating  with  internal  power,  not  from 
the  imposed  will  of  a  lawgiver.  And  our  present  duty 
here,  at  least  on  this  cuiestion,  may  be  in  some  measure 
satisfied,  if  we  aid  this  growth. 

Two  great  schools  of  jurisprudence  for  a  while  di- 
^dded  the  learned  mind  of  Germany,  —  one  known  as 
the  Historic,  the  other  as  the  Pidactio.  The  question 
between  them  was  similar  to  that  now  before  the  Con- 
vention. The  first  regarded  all  laws  and  institutions  as 
the  growth  of  custom,  under  constant  influences  of  his- 
tory ;  the  other  insisted  upon  positive  legislation,  giving 
to  them  a  form  in  conformity  with  abstract  reason.  Ifc 
is  clear  that  both  were  in  a  measure  right.  No  law- 
giver or  statesman  can  disregard  either  history  or  ab- 
stract reason.  He  must  contemplate  both.  He  will 
faithfully  study  the  Past,  and  will  rec<^ize  its  treas- 
ures and  traditions ;  but,  with  equal  fidelity,  he  wiU  set 
his  face  towards  the  Future,  where  all  institutions  will 
at  last  be  in  harmony  with  truth. 

I  have  been  encouraged  to  believe  in  the  practicahili- 
ty  of  the  District  System  by  its  conformity  with  reason, 
and  by  seeing  how  naturally  it  went  into  operation  un- 
der the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  But  there 
is  a  difference  between  that  ease  and  the  present,  A 
new  Gtovemment  was  then  founded,  with  new  powers. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND   ITS  PROPER  BASIS.  253' 

applicable  to  a  broad  expanse  of  country;  but  the  Gon- 
atitution  of  Massachusetts  was  little  more  than  a  con- 
tinuation of  preexisting  usages  and  institutiona,  with 
all  dependence  upon  royalty  removed.  This  distinction 
may  help  us  now.  If  the  country  were  absolutely  new, 
without  embari'assmeut  from  existing  corporate  rights, 
—  claims  I  would  rather  call  them,  —  it  might  easily 
be  arranged  a^coMing  to  the  most  approved  theory,  as 
Philadelphia  is  said  to  have  been  originally  laid  out  on 
the  model  of  the  German  city  which  its  great  founder 
had  seen  in  his  travels.^  But  to  bring  our  existing  sys- 
tem into  symmetry,  and  to  lay  it  out  anew,  would  seem 
to  bo  a  task  —  at  least  I  am  reluctantly  led  to  this  con- 
clusion by  what  I  have  heard  here  —  not  unlike  that  of 
rebuilfhng  Boston,  and  of  shaping  its  compact  mass  of 
crooked  streets  into  the  regular  rectangular  forms  of  the 
city  of  Penn.  And  yet  tliia  is  not  impossible.  With 
each  day,  by  demolishing  ancient  houses  and  widenii^ 
ancient  ways,  changes  are  made  which  tend  to  this  re- 
sult. 

Sir,  we  must  recognize  the  existing  condition  of  things, 
remedy  aU  practical  grievances  so  far  as  possible,  and 
set  our  faces  towards  the  true  aystem.  We  must  act  in 
the  Present,  but  be  mindful  also  of  the  Future.  There 
are  proper  occasions  for  compromise,  as  most  certainly 
there  are  rights  beyond  compromise.  But  the  Eepresen- 
tative  System  is  an  expedient  or  device  for  ascertain- 
ing the  popular  will,  and,  though  well  satisfied  that  this 
can  be  best  founded  on  numbers,  I  would  not  venture 
to  say,  m  the  present  light  of  political  science,  that  the 
right  of  each  man  to  an  equal  representation,  accordii^ 
to  the  liule  of  Three,  and  without  regard  to  existing  in- 
'  Jullna,  Hordflmeiika8.Sitl:liolioZustBnde,.BnndL  p.  92, 


■cibyGoogIc 


254  THE    REPEESESTATIVE    SYSTEM, 

stitutioiia  or  controlling  usages,  is  of  that  inherent  and 
lofty  character  ■ — ■  like  tlie  God-given  right  to  life  or  lib- 
erty —  which  admits  of  no  compromise. 

Several  grievances  exist,  which  will  he  removed  hy 
the  proposed  amendments.  There  is  one  which  I  had 
hoped  would  disappear,  hut  which  is  the  necessary  inci- 
dent of  corporate  representation :  I  mean  the  unwieldy 
size  of  the  House. 

It  is  generally  said  that  a  small  hody  is  more  open 
to  bribery  and  corruption  than  a  large  body ;  bnt,  on 
the  other  hand,  I  have  heard  it  asserted  that  the  larger 
is  more  exposed  than  the  smaller.  I  put  this  consid- 
eration aside.  My  objection  to  a  lai^e  House  is,  that 
it  is  inconvenient  for  the  despatch  of  public  business. 
There  is  a  famous  saying  of  Cardinal  de  Eetz,  that 
every  assembly  of  more  than  one  hundred  is  a  mob ; 
and  Lord  Chesterfield  appUed  the  same  term  to  the 
British  House  of  Commons.  At  the  present  time  that 
body  has  nominally  six  hundred  and  fifty-four  mem- 
bers. It  is  called  by  Lord  Brougham  "preposterously 
lai^o " ;  but  a  quorum  for  business  is  forty  only ;  and 
it  is  only  on  rare  occasions  of  political  importance  that 
its  benches  are  completely  occrrpied.  Tlie  House  of 
Lords,  nominally,  has  four  hundred  and  fifty-nine  mem- 
bers; bnt  a  CLUorum  in  this  body  consists  of  three  only;^ 
and  much  of  its  business  is  transacted  in  a  very  thin 
attendance. 

The  experience  of.  Congress,  as  also  of  other  States, 

points  to  a  reduction  of  our  present  number.     Indeed, 

for  many  years  this  was  a  general  desire  through  the 

State.     In  the  earliest  Colonial  days  every  town  was 

1  According  to  the  old  rule,  Ti-a  /"acsun/  aolUgiim. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND   ITS   PROPER  BASIS.  255 

allowed  three  deputies ;  but  in  five  yeais  the  number, 
on  reaching  thirty-three,  was  reduced  to  two  for  ea^h.' 
At  a  later  day,  in  1694,  a  great  contest  in  the  House 
was  decided  by  a  vote  of  twenty-aix  against  twenty- 
four.^  In  the  agitating  period  between  1762  and  1773, 
covering  the  controversies  which  heralded  the  Eevolu- 
tion,  the  House  consisted,  on  an  average,  of  one  hundi-ed 
and  twenty  members ;  and  only  on  one  occasion  the 
magnitude  of  the  interest  is  reported  by  Hutehinson  to 
have  drawn  together  so  many  as  one  hundred  and  thir- 
teen. At  the  last  session  of-  the  Provincial  L^islature, 
in  May,  1774,  when  the  Eevolutionary  conflict  was  at 
hand,  the  complete  returns  of  the  Journal  show  one 
hundred  and  forty.  In  1776  there  was  a  House  of 
three  hundred  and  five ;  but  this  "  enonnoug  and  very 
unwieldy  size,"  according  to  the  language  of  the  time, 
was  assigned  as  a  reason  for  a  new  Constitution.  I 
regret  that  we  cannot  profit  by  this  experience,  A 
House  of  two  hundred  and  fifty,  or,  since  we  are  accus- 
tomed to  large  congr^ations,^  of  three  hundred  at  most, 
would  be  an  improvement  on  the  present  system 

There  are  two  proposed  improvements  which  I  hail 
with  satisfaction :  one  relates  to  the  small  towns,  and 
the  other  to  the  cities.  Tlie  small  towns  will  have  a 
more  constant  representation;  and. this  of  itself  is  an 

1  Records  of  t1ie  Governor  and  Company  of  the  MassachaseWs  Bay,  Vol. 
I.  pp.  118,  260,  354. 

S  Hntchinson,  History  of  MaBsaohusetta,  Vol.  U.  p.  1?. 

*  The  Hoase  for  many  years  numbered  upwarfs  of  fiye  hundred  mem- 
hsTB, — in  1836,'  '36,  and  '37  swelling  to  the  truly  "  enormous  and  unwieldy 
size"  of  al6,  819,  and  886;  and  even  nnder  the  greatly  reduced  appoition^ 
ment  estnbiished  by  the  Amendment  of  1840,  the  numbers  In  the  two  years 
(1861  ai)dl85a)precedingthepreBent  Convention  were  no  less  than  896  and 
403.    See  Gifford  and  Stowe's  Manual  for  the  General  Court,  (Boston,  1880,) 


;db,Googlc 


256         THE  BEPRGSESTATIVE  SYSTEM, 

approacTi  to  the  true  principle  of  representation,  which 
should  be  constant  as  well  aa  equal.  The  cities  will  be 
divided  into  districts,  and  this  I  regard  of  twofold  im- 
portance :  first,  as  the  beginning  of  a  true  system  ;  and, 
secondly,  as  reducing  the  power  which  the  cities,  by 
the  large  number  of  their  representatives,  chosen  by 
general  ticket,  now  exercise. 

A  respected  gentleman,  now  in  my  eye,  has  reminded 
me  that  in  boyhood  his  attention  was  arrested  in  this 
House  by  what  was  called  "the  Boston  seat,"  reserved 
exclusively  for  the  Boston  members,  who  sat  together 
on  cushions,  -while  other  members  were  left  to  such  ac- 
commodation as  they  could  find  on  bare  benciies.  This 
discrimination  ceased  long  ago.  But  it  seems  to  me 
that  this  reserved  and  cushioned  seat  is  typical  of  an- 
other discrimination,  which  Boston,  in  common  with  the 
cities,  stiU  enjoys,  Sir,  in  voting  for  forty-four  rep- 
resentatives, the  elector  in  Boston  exercises  a  repre- 
sentative power  far  exceeding  that  of  electors  in  the 
country;  and  the  majority  which  rules  Boston  and  de- 
termines the  whole  delegation  exercises  a  representative 
power  transcending  far  that  of  any  similar  number  in 
the  Commonwealth.  This  is  apparent  on  the  bare  state- 
ment, as  forty-four  sticks  are  stronger  in  one  compact 
bundle  than  when  single  or  in  small  parcels,  ITius, 
while  other  counties  are  divided,  the  delegation  from 
Boston  is  united.  In  all  political  contests,  it  is  like  the 
weH-knit  Macedonian  phalanx,  or  the  iron  front  of  the 
Roman  legion,  in  comparison  with  the  disconnected  in- 
dividual warriors  against  whom  they  were  engaged. 
This  abuse  will  be  removed ;  and  here  is  the  beginning, 
I  had  almost  said  the  inauguration,  of  a  true  electoral 
equality  in  our  Commonwealth. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AND  ITS  PEOPEE  BASIS.  257 

And  now,  in  conclusion,  wliile  thanking  geutlemen 
for  tlie  tind  attention  with  whicli  they  have  honored 
me,  let  me  express  briefly  the  result  to  which  I  have 
come,  I  have  openly  declared  my  convictions  with 
regard  to  the  District  System,  and  in  accordance  with 
tlese  ia  e  recoiled  my  ^otes  m  this  Convention 
Tl  eso  \  otes  whioh  leveal  my  jnmobt  desiies  on  this 
mattei  I  would  not  ul  a  ge  But  the  quest  on  is  not 
now  between  the  Diatiict  Sjstem  wlich  I  ct  et  so 
madi  foi  Misaacl  Ubetts  i  d  the  pro^  o  ed  imei  dments 
but  bet  eei  tl  ese  amen  1  nei  ta  an  1  tJ  e  e\L  t  g  j  ■) 
tem  On  tl  is  issue  I  decide  w  thout  h(,s  tati  n  I 
shall  1  ote  Sir  for  tl  e  pio^  sitions  of  amen  li  ent  be 
fore  the  Convention  should  they  come  to  a  q  estion  on 
their  final  passa  e  n  t  1  eca  ise  tl  ey  a  e  all  that  I  de 
sue  not  1  ecause  they  satisfy  the  leq  urement  of  j  r  n 
Liples  vh  ch  I  cinnot  deny  not  beci  ise  tliey  oonstit  te 
a  lernjinent  aljustmc,  t  ot  this  difli  ult  question  but 
1  ecause  tl  cy  are  tl  c  best  which  I  cin  now  oltam  be 
ciuse  tley  refoi  n  grievances  f  the  existing  system 
an  1  because  they  begin  a  change  which  can  end  only  m 
the  estibl  shment  ot  a  Pepresent'itive  bystem  fo  nded 
m  reahty  ai  m  name  on  Slq  htj  Their  aloption 
will  be  the  triumph  of  coi  cihation  ind  harmony  ind 
^  U  1  r  iis,h  new  testimony  to  the  weU-tempeied  hpiiit 
of  our  institutions,  where 


■cibyGoogIc 


BILLS  or  EIGHTS:  THEIE  HISTORY  AND 


Speech  on  the  Report  from  the  ( 
Massacjiusetts,  July  25, 1853. 


As  Cliairman  of  the  Committee  on  the  Bill  of  Rights,  Mr.  Sumner 
suliniitteil  a  lleport,  on  which,  in  Committee  of  the  "Whole,  he  spoke  as 
follows. 

MR.  CHAIEMAN,  — As  Chairman  of  the  Commit- 
tee on  the  Preamble  and  BUI  of  Eights,  it  is  my 
duty  to  introduce  and  explain  their  Report.  It  will  be 
perceived  that  it  is  brief,  and  proposes  no  important 
changes.  But  in  justice  to  the  distinguished  gentlemen 
with  whom  I  have  the  honor  of  being  associated  on 
that  Committee,  I  deem  it  my  duty  to  suggest  that  the 
extent  of  their  labors  must  not  be  judged  by  this  result. 
It  appears  from  the  proceedings  of  the  Convention  of 
1820,  that  the  Committee  on  the  Bill  of  Eights  at  that 
time  sat  longer  than  any  othei  Committee.  I  helieve 
that  the  same  Committee  in  the  present  Convention 
might  claim  the  same  preeminence.  Their  records 
show  twenty  different  sessions. 

At  these  sessions,  the  Preamble  and  the  Bill  of 
Eights,  in  its  thirty  different  propositions,  were  passed 
in  review  and  considered  clause  by  clause ;  the  various 
orders  of  the  Convention,  amounting  to  twelve  in  num- 


■cibyGooglc 


BILLS  OF  RIGHTS  :  THEIR  HISTOKY  AND  POLICY.       269 

ber,  the  petitions  addressed  to  the  Convention  and  re- 
ferred to  the  Committee,  as  also  informal  propositions 
from  members  of  the  Convention  and  otliers  were  con- 
aidered,  some  of  them  repeatedly  and  at  length.  On 
many  questions  there  was  a  decided  difference  of  opin- 
ion, and  on  a  few  the  Committee  was  nearly  equally 
divided.  But  after  the  hest  consideration  we  could  he- 
stow  in  our  protracted  series  of  meetings,  it  was  found 
that  the  few  simple  propositions  now  on  your  table 
were  aU  upon  which  a  majority  of  the  Committee  could 
be  brought  to  unite.  Aa  such  I  was  directed  to  present 
them.  Admonished  by  the  lapse  of  time  and  the  desire 
to  close  these  proceedings,  I  might  be  content  with  this 
simple  statement. 

But,  notwithstandmg  the  ui^ency  of  our  business,  I 
cannot  allow  the  opportunity  to  pass  —  indeed,  I  should 
not  do  my  duty  —  without  attempting  for  a  brief  mo- 
ment to  show  the  origin  and  character  of  this  part  of 
our  Constitution.  In  this  way  we  may  learn  its  we^ht 
and  authority,  and  appreciate  the  difficulty  and  dehcacy 
of  any  change  in  its  substance  or  even  its  form.  I  will 
try  not  to  abuse  your  patience. 

The  Preamble  and  Bill  of  Eights,  like  the  rest  of 
our  Constitution,  were  from  the  pen  of  John  Adam.?,— 
among  whose  published  works  the  whole  document,  in 
its  original  draught,  may  be  found.  At  the  time  when 
he  rendered  this  important  service  to  his  native  Com- 
monwealth and  to  the  principles  of  free  institutions 
everywhere,  he  was  forty-four  years  of  age.  He  was 
also  quite  prepared.  The  natural  maturity  of  his  powere 
had  been  enriched  by  the  well-ripened  fruit  of  assidu- 
ous study  and  of  active  hfe,  both  of  which  concurred  in 


■cibyGoogIc 


260  BILLS  OF  EIGHTS  : 

IiinL  The  examples  of  Greece  and  Rome  and  the  writ- 
ings of  Sidney  and  Locke  were  especially  familiar  to 
his  mind.  The  Common  Law  he  had  made  his  own,  and 
mastered  well  its  whole  arsenal  of  Freedom.  For  a 
long  time  the  vigorous  and  unfailii^  partisan  of  the  lib- 
eral cause  in  Boston,  throughout  its  many  conflicts, — 
then  in  Congress,  whither  he  was  transferred,  the  irre- 
sistible champion  of  Independence,  —  and  then  the  re- 
publican representative  of  the  United,  but  still  strug- 
gling. Colonies  at  the  Court  of  France,  —  in  the  brief 
interval  between  two  foreign  missions,  only  seven  days 
after  landii^  from  his  long  ocean  voyage,  he  was  chosen 
a  delegate  to  the  Constitutional  Convention,  and  at  once 
brought  all  his  varied  experience,  rare  political  culture, 
and  eminent  powers  to  the  task  of  adjusting  the  frame- 
work of  govemment  for  Massachusetts.  As  his  work, 
it  all  claims  our  r^ard ;  and  no  part  bears  the  imprint 
of  his  mind  so  much  as  the  Preamble  and  Bill  of  Eights ; 
nor  is  any  other  part  authenticated  as  coining  so  exclu- 
sively from  him. 

At  the  time  of  its  iirst  adoption  the  Massachusetts 
Bill  of  Eights  was  more  ample  in  provisions  and  more 
complete  in  form  than  any  similar  declaration  in  Eng- 
lish or  Colonial  history.  Glancing  at  its  predecessors, 
we  learn  something  of  its  sources.  First  came,  long 
back  in  the  thirteenth  century.  Magna  Charta,  with  gen- 
erous safeguards  of  Freedom,  wrung  from  King  John  by 
the  Barons  at  Eunnymede.  From  time  to  time  these 
liberties  were  confirmed,  and,  after  an  interval  of  centu- 
ries, they  were  again  ratified,  near  the  b^inning  of  the 
unhappy  reign  of  Charles  the  First,  by  a  Parliamentary 
Declaration,  to  which  the  monaixih  assented,  known  as 
the  Petition  of  E^ht,  which,  in  its  very  title,  reveals  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


THEIE  niSTORY   AND    POLICY.  261 

humility  with  which  the  rights  of  the  people  were  then 
maintained.  Pinally,  in  a  different  tone  and  language, 
at  the  Eevolution  of  1688,  when  James  the  Second  was 
driven  from  his  dominions,  a  "  Declaration  of  the  true, 
ancient,  and  indubitable  rights  and  liheities  of  the  peo- 
ple of  the  kiBgdom,"  familiarly  known  ^  the  Bill  of 
Rights,  was  deUvered  by  the  Convention  Parliament  to 
the  new  sovereigns,  William  and  Mary,  and  embodied 
in  the  Act  of  Settlement,  by  virtue  of  which  they  sat 
on  the  throne.     These,  Sir,  are  English  examples. 

Their  influence  was  not  confined  to  England.  It 
crossed  the  oceaiL  From  the  beginning  the  Colonists 
were  tenacious  of  the  rights  and  hberties  of  English- 
men, and  at  various  tim'es  and  in  various  forms  de- 
clared them.  Connecticut,  as  early  as  1639,  Virginia 
in  1624  and  IVVe,  Pennsylvania  in  1682,  New  York  in 
1691,  —  and  I  might  mention  others  still,  — put  forth 
Declarations,  brief  and  meagre,  but  kindred  to  those  of 
the  mother  country.  In  the  Colony  of  New  Plymoutli, 
the  essential  principles  of  Magna  Oharta  were  pro- 
claimed in  1636,  under  the  name  of  "The  General  Fun- 
damentals " ;  and  in  1641  the  inhabitants  of  Massachu- 
setts Bay  announced,  in  words  worthy  of  careful  study, 
that  "the  free  fruition  of  such  Liberties,  Immunities, 
and  Privileges,  as  Humanity,  Civihty  and  Christianity 
call  for,  as  due  to  eveiy  man  in  h  pl-ice  and  propor- 
tion, without  impeachment  and  inf  nee  nent  hath  ever 
been  and  ever  will  be  the  tranqu  11  ty  a  1  tal  ility  of 
Churches  and  Commonwealths,  a  1  tl  e  de  al  or  de- 
prival  thereof  the  disturbance,  if  not  tl  e  ru      ot  both."  ^ 

•  Preamblato  the  Body  of  Liberties  of  the  MaBsaohusetts  Colony,  1841: 
Coll.  Mnsa.  Hist.  Soo.,  8d  Ser.  Vol  VIII.  p.  219.  See  also  Oeiieral  Laws 
and  Liberties  of  the  Massnohnsetts  Colony,  revised  aiid  reprinted  by  Order 
of  the  General  Court,  1672,  p.  1. 


■cibyGoogIc 


262  BILLS   OF  RICiHTS  ; 

Such  was  the  Preamble  to  the  "Body  oi'  Libeities  "  of 
tlie  Massachusetts  Colony  in  1641.  It  would  be  diffi- 
cult to  find  any  text  more  comprehensive  than  these 
remai'kahle  words,  —  the  object  being  "Liberties,  Im- 
.  munities, and  Privileges,"  to  such  extent  "as  Humanity, 
Civility,  arid  Christianity  call  for " ;  and  this  Declara- 
tion, broader  than  Magua  Charta,  became  the  uispira- 
tion  of  Massachusetts,  if  not  of  the  Nation.  Kor  does 
Massachusetts  stand  alone  in  this  honor.  Connecticut 
is  by  her  side.^ 

I  should  not  do  justice  to  this  "  Body  of  Liberties,"  if 
I  did  not  call  attention  to  at  least  four  different  dec- 
larations. Tliere  is,  first,  the  clause :  "  There  shall  nev- 
er be  any  bond  slavery,  villenage,  or  captivity  amongst 
us,  unless  it  be  lawful  captives  taken  in  just  wars,  and 
such  strangers  as  willingly  sell  tliemselves  or  are  sold 
to  us  " ;  and  altliough  this  provision  falls  short  of  that 
universal  freedom  which  is  our  present  aspiration,  it  is 
a  plain  limitation  upon  Slavery,  and  marks  the  hostility 
of  the  Colony.  Anotlier  declaration  sets  an  example  of 
hospitality :  "  If  any  people  of  otlier  nations,  professing 
the  true  Christian  religion,  shall  flee  to  us  from  the  tyr- 
anny or  oppression  of  their  persecutors,  or  from  fam- 
ine, wars,  or  the  like  necessary  and  compulsory  cause, 
they  shall  be  entertained  and  succored  amongst  us  ac- 
cording to  that  power  and  prudence  God  shall  give  us." 
And  it  is  further  declared:  "Every  person  within  this 
jiniadiction,  whether  inhabitant  or  foreigner,  shall  enjoy 
the  same  Justice  and  Law  that  is  general  for  the  Plan- 

1  Tlia  Preamble  in  coiiibination  with  the  tirst  Article  of  the  Massaolin- 
setts  Body  of  Libei-ties  wns  adopted  ns  the  PreJimble  to  llie  Coiineetiout 
Code  of  ]e50.  Eae  Public  Records  of  the  Colony  of  Connecticut,  edited  by 
J.  H.  Trumbull,  (Hartford,  I860,)  p.  BOS;  and  compare  with  Coll.  Mats. 
Hist.  Soc,  of  supra. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THEIE  HISTORY  AHD   POLICY,  263 

tatioii,  whieli  we  constitute  and  execute  one  towards 
another,  without  partiality  or  delay."  Here  is  nothing 
less  than  Equality  before  the  Law,  without  this  com- 
pendious term.  There  is  another  declaration,  which  has 
the  same  exalted  character:  "Every  man,  whether  in- 
habitant or  foreigner,  free  or  not  free,  shall  have  liberty 
to  come  to  any  public  Court,  Council,  or  Town  Meeting, 
and  either  by  speech  or  writing  to  move  any  lawful, 
seasonable,  and  material  question,  or  to  present  any 
necessary  motion,  complaint,  petition,  bill,  or  informal 
tion,  whereof  that  meeting  hath  proper  cognizance,  so 
it  be  done  in  convenient  time,  due  order,  and  respective 
manner."  Such  declarations  as  these  belong  to  the  his- 
tory of  Freedom. 

lu  the  animated  discussions  immediately  preceding 
the  Eevolution,  the  rights  and  liberties  of  Englishmen 
were  constantly  asserted  as  the  birthright  of  the  Colo- 
nists. This  was  often  by  formal  resolution  or  declara^ 
tion,  couched  at  first  in  moderate  phrase.  At  the  out- 
rage of  the  Stamp  Act,  a  Congress  of  delegates  from 
nine  Colonies,  held  at  New  York  in  October,  1765,  put 
forth  a  series  of  resolutions  embodying  "Declarations  of 
our  humble  opinion  respecting  the  most  essential  rights 
and  liberties  of  the  Colonists."^  The  humility  of  this 
lai^ut^e  recalls  the  English  Petition  of  Right  under 
Charles  the  First.  Tiiis  was  followed  in  1774  hy  the 
Declaration  of  the  Continental  Congress,  -which,  in  an- 
other tone  and  with  admirable  force,  in  ten  different 
propositions,  arrays  the  rights  which  belong  to  "the 
inhabitants  of  the  English  Colonies  in  North  America, 
by  the  immutable  Laws  of  Nature,  the  Principles  of  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


264  BILLS   OF  RIGHTS: 

English  Constitution,  and  the  several  Charters  or  Com- 
pacts." ^ 

"  Time's  noblest  offspriag  is  tlie  last"; 

and  the  whole  Colonial  series  is  aptly  closed  by  the 
Declaration  of  Independence,  announcing  not  merely 
the  rights  of  Englishmen,  hut  the  rights  of  men. 

Only  a  few  brief  weeks  before  the  Declaration  of 
Independence,  Viiginia,  taking  the  lead  of  her  sister 
Colonies,  established  a  Constitution,  to  which  was  pre- 
fixed an  elaborate  Declaration  of  Bights.  This  remark- 
able document,  which  became  the  immediate  precedent 
for  the  whole  country,  marks  an  epoch  in  political  histo- 
ry. Massachusetts  and  Connecticut  had  already  led  the' 
way  in  that  early  and  most  comprehensive  Pi-eamble, 
which  has  been  too  little  noticed ;  but  in  all  English 
Declarations  of  Eights,  and  generally  even  in  those  of 
the  Colonies,  stress  was  laid  upon  the  liberties  and  priv- 
ileges of  Englishmen.  The  r^hts  claimed  even  by  the 
Continental  Congress  of  1774,  in  their  masculine  Decla- 
ration, were  the  rights  of  "free  and  natural-horn  sub- 
jects within  the  realm  of  England."  But  the  Virginia 
Bill  of  Eights,  standing  at  the  front  of  its  first  Con- 
stitution, discarded  all  narrow  title  from  mere  English 
precedent,  planted  itself  on  the  eternal  law  of  God, 
above  every  human  ordinanco,  and  openly  proclaimed 
that  "  all  men  are  by  nature  equally  free  and  indepen- 
dent," —  a  declaration  which  is  repeated,  though  in 
other  language,  by  the  Massachusetts  Declaration  of 
Eights. 

The  policy  of  Bills  of  Rights  is  sometimes  called  in 
question.     It  has  been  said  that  they  were  originally 

•  Journals  of  Congress,  October  11, 1774,  Yol.  I.  p.  28. 


;db,Googlc 


TIIEIE  HISTOEY   AND   POLICY.  2G5 

privileges  or  concessions  extorted  from  tlie  king,  and, 
though  expedient  in  a  monarchy,  are  of  little  value  in  a 
republie.  As  late  as  1821,  in  the  Convention  for  re- 
vising the  Constitution  of  New  York,  doubts  of  their 
utility  were  openly  expressed  ty  Mr.  Van  Buren.  But 
they  are  now  above  c[uestion.  State  after  State,  ending 
with  California,  foUowa  the  example  of  Virginia  and 
Massachusetts,  and  places  its  Bill  of  Eights  in  the  front 
of  its  Constitution.  Nor  can  I  doubt  that  much  good 
is  done  by  this  firank  assertion  of  fundamental  princi- 
ples. The  public  mind  is  instructed,  people  learn  to 
know  their  rights,  liberal  institutions  are  coniirmed, 
and  the  Constitution  is  made  stable  in  the  hearts  of 
the  community.  Bills  of  Eights  are  lessons  of  poKtical 
wisdom  and  anchors  of  liberty.  They  are  the  constant 
index,  and  also  seoui^e,  of  injustice  and  wrong.  In 
Massachusetts,  Slavery  itself  disappeared  before  the 
declaration  that  "all  men  are  bom  free  and  eq^uai," 
interpreted  by  a  liberty-lovir^  Court.^ 

In  the  Convention  of  1780  the  EUl  of  Eights  formed 
a  prominent  subject  of  interest.  The  necessity  of  such 
a  safeguard  had  been  pressed  upon  the  people,  and  its 
absence  from  the  Constitution  of  1*778  was  unquestion- 
ably a  reason  for  the  rejection  of  that  ill-fated  effort. 
Indeed,  the  Constitution  was  openly  opposed  because  it 
had  no  Bill  of  Eights.  In  the  array  of  objections  at 
the  period  was  the  following,  which  I  talre  from  an  im- 
portant contemporaneous  publication :  "  That  a  BiU  of 
Eights,  clearly  ascertaining  and  defining  the  rights  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


26(3  BILLS   OF  KIGHTS  : 

conscience  and  that  security  of  person  and  property 
which  every  member  in  the  State  hath  a  right  to  expect 
from  the  supreme  power  thereof,  ought  to  be  settled 
and  estahhahed  previous  to  the  ratification  of  any  Con- 
stitution for  the  State."  ^  Accordingly,  at  the  earhest 
moment  after  the  oi^onization  of  the  Convention,  a  mo- 
tion was  made,  "that  there  he  a  Declaration  of  Eights 
prepared  previous  to  the  framing  a  new  Constitution 
of  Government,"  which  after  adoption  gave  way  to  an- 
other, "  that  the  Convention  10UI  prepare  a  Declaration 
of  Eights,"  and  this  motion  prevailed  by  a  nearly  unan- 
imous vote,  —  the  whole  number  present,  as  returned 
by  the  monitors,  being  two.  hundred  and  fifty-one,  of 
whom  two  hundred  and  fifty  voted  in  the  affirmative.^ 
Thus  emphatically  did  the  early  fathers  of  Massachu- 
setts manifest  their  watchfulness  for  the  rights  of  the 
people ;  and  there  is  good  reason  to  believe,  also,  that 
among  the  motives  which  stimulated  it  was  a  determi- 
nation in  this  way  to  abolish  Slavery .^  Tlie  Convention 
then  resolved  to  "  proceed  to  the  framing  a  new  Consti- 
tution of  Government."  A  grand  Committee  of  thirty 
was  chosen  to  perform  these  two  important  duties ;  and 
this  Committee,  after  extended  discussion,  intrusted  to 
John  Adams  alone  the  preparation  of  a  Declaration  of 
Eights,  and  to  a  Snb-Committee,  consisting  of  James 
Bowdoin,  Samuel  Adams,  and  John  Adams,  the  duty  of 
preparing  the  Form  of  a  Constitution,  which  Sub-Com- 
mittee again  delegated  the  task  to  John  Adams :  so  that 

1  Esses  Result,  p.  4. 

2  Joufnal  of  the  Convention,  pp.  22,  23. 

»  This  WAS  tlie  (aatimony  of  the  lale  Rev.  Charles  Lowall,  wlio  liad  re- 
ceived it  from  liis  ather,  Hon.  John  Lowell,  a  member  of  the  Convention,  in 
whose  family  was  a  tmilition  that  the  hitter  obtained  the  insertion  of  the 
words  ''811  men  Kre  horn  fi'ee  and  equal,"  for  this  declared  purpose.  See, 
ul  aiqira,  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soo.,  «h  Ser.  Vol,  IV.  p.  340. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THEIK  HISTORY   AND   POLICY.  267 

to  the  pen  of  this  illustrioiis  citizen  we  are  indebted 
primarily  both  for  the  ])eclaratioa  of  Eights  and  tlie 
Porm  of  the  Constitution.^ 

It  is  not  difficult  to  trace  most,  if  not  all,  of  the 
ideas  and  provisions  of  ou^  Preamble  and  Declaration 
of  Rights  to  their  primitive  sources.  The  Preamble, 
where  the  body  poUtic  is  founded  on  the  fiction  of  the 
Social  Compact,  was  doubtless  inspired  by  the  writings 
of  Sidney  and  Locke,  and  by  the  English  discussions  at 
the  period  of  the  Eevolution  of  1688,  when  this  ques- 
tionable theory  did  good  service  in  response  to  the  as- 
sumptions of  Filmer,  and  as  a  shield  against  arbitrary 
power.  Of  different  provisions  in  the  Bill  of  Eights, 
some  are  in  the  very  words  of  Magna  Charts,  —  others 
are  derived  from  the  ancient  Common  Law,  the  Petition 
of  Eight,  and  the  BiU  of  Rights  of  1688,  —  while,  of  the 
thirty  Articles  composing  it,  no  less  than  nineteen,^ 
either  wholly  or  in  part,  may  be  found  substantially 
in  the  Vii^nia  BiU  of  Eights ;  but  these  again  are  in 
great  part  derived  from  the  earher  fountains. 

And  now,  Sir,  yon  have  before  you  for  revision  and 
amendment  this  early  work  of  our  fathers,  I  do  not 
stop  to  consider  its  pecuhar  merits.  With  satisfaction 
I  might  point  to  special  safeguards  by  which  our  rights 
have  been  protected  against  usurpation,  whether  execu- 
tive, legislative,  or  judicial  With  pride  I  might  dwell 
on  those  words  which  banished  Slavery  from  our  soil, 

1  ObservRtiorB  on  the  Reconstmotion  of  Government  in  Slassachusetts 
during  the  Revolution;  Works  of  John  Adams,  Vol.  IV.  pp.  216,  2IB. 

9  Namely,  Articles  1,  2,  4-10,  12-18,20,  26,  30.  The  Virginia  Bill  of 
Eights  eoneiats'  of  sixteen  Articles,  three  of  which  (the  6th,  Sth.  and  8t1i) 
nro  divided  in  the  Mnssnchneatts  Decimation,  constituting  fespeotively  the 
Enl>stBnce  pf  ArtJcTes  30  and  8,  9  and  !0, 12  and  13. 


■cibyGoogIc 


268  BILLS    OF   EIGHTS. 

and  rendered  the  Declaration  of  Independence  here 
with  us  a  living  letter.  But  the  hour  does  not  rec[uire 
or  admit  any  such  service.  You  have  a  practical  duty, 
which  I  seek  to  promote ;  and  I  now  take  leave  of  the 
whole  subject,  with  the  simple  remark,  that  a  document 
proceeding  from  such  a  pen,  drawn  from  such  sources, 
with  such  an  origin  in  aU.  respects,  speaking  so  early 
for  Human  Eights,  and  now  for  more  than  threescore 
years  and  ten  a  household  word  to  the  people  of  Mas- 
sachuaette,  should  be  touched  by  the  Convention  only 
with  exceeding  care. 


■cibyGoogIc 


FIIfGEE-POINT  FROM  PLYMOUTH  ROCK. 


[  at  the   pl.yblou'fh   festival   in  commemoration  < 
Eiibaiii;atio»  of  the  Pilgrims,  August  1,  1853. 


The  President,  Eieliard  Warren,  Eaq^.,  said  they  had  already  been 
delighted  with  the  words  of  a  distinguished  momlier  of  the  Senate  of 
the  United  States  [Mr.  Eterett.]  They  were  favored  with  the  pres- 
ence of  another ;  and  he  would  give  as 


In  his  reply,  Mr.  Sumner  atlsmpted  to  obtain  a  hearing  for  the  Anti- 
slavery  cause  aiid  the  Party  of  FKedom.  In  picturing  the  English 
Puritans  he  had  in  mind  our  Antislavery  Puritans,  who,  like  their 
prototypes,  were  at  fiist  "Separatists,"  and  then  "Independents," 
The  abuse  showered  on  each  was  the  same.  Though  nothing  is  said 
directly  on  present  affairs,  they  were  clearly  discerned  behind  Uie  Puri- 
tan veil.  Such  was  the  sensibility  in  certain  quarters,  tliat  it  was 
objected  io  as  out  of  place.  Others  were  pleased  with  its  fidelity. 
Among  the  latter  was  the  poet  John  G.  "Whittier,  who  wrote  at  the 
time:  "Its  tone  and  bearing  ai^e unmistakable,  and  yet  unobjection- 
able  When  I  read  Uie  toast  which  called  thee  up,  I  confess  I 

could  see  very  little  appropriateness  in  it ;  in  fact,  it  seemed  to  me  a 
very  unpromising  text,  and  I  almost  feared  to  read  tlio  sermon.  I  en- 
joyed it  all  the  better  for  my  misgivings." 

ME.  PRESIDENT,  — You  bid  me  apeak  for  the 
Senate  of  the  United  States.  But  I  know  well 
that  there  is  another  voice  here,  of  classical  eloquence, 
which  might  more  fitly  render  this  service.  As  one 
of  the  humblest  membera  of  that  body,  and  associ- 
ated with  the  public  councils  for  a  brief  period  only, 


■cibyGoogIc 


270  FINGER-POINT   FROM   PLYMOUTH   HOCK. 

I  should  prefer  that  my  distmguished  colleague  [Mr. 
EvERETi'],  whose  fame  is  linked  with  a  long  pohtieal 
life,  should  speak  for  it.  And  tliere  is  yet  another  here 
[Mr.  Hale],  who,  though  not  at  this  moment  a  member 
of  the  Senate,  has,  throughout  an  active  and  brilliant 
career,  marked  by  a  rare  combination  of  abiUty,  elo- 
quence, and  good-humor,  so  identified  himself  with  the 
Senate  in  the  public  mind  that  he  might  well  speak  for 
it  always,  and  when  he  speaks,  all  are  pleased  to  listen. 
But,  Sir,  you  have  ordered  it  otherwise. 

Prom  the  tears  and  trials  at  Delft  Haven,  ivom  the 
declf  of  the  Mayflower,  from  the  lanchng  on  Plymouth 
Kock,  to  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  is  a  mighty 
contrast,  covering  whole  spaces  of  history,  hardly  less 
than  from  tlie  wolf  that  suckled  Eomulua  and  Eemus 
to  that  lioman  Senate  which  on  cumle  chairs  swayed 
Italy  and  the  world.  From  these  obscure  beginnings 
of  poverty  and  weakness,  which  you  now  piously  com- 
memorate, and  on  which  all  our  minds  naturally  rest 
to-day,  you  bid  us  leap  to  that  marble  Capitol,  where 
thirty-one  powerful  republics,  bound  in  common  fellow- 
ship and  welfare,  are  gathered  together  in  legislative 
body,  constituting  One  Government,  which,  stretching 
from  ocean  to  ocean,  and  counting  milhons  of  people 
beneath  its  majestic  rule,  surpasses  far  in  wealth  and 
might  any  government  of  the  Old  "World  when  the 
little  band  of  Pilgnms  left  it,  and  now  promises  to  be  a 
clasp  between  Europe  and  Asia,  bringing  the  most  dis- 
tant places  near  together,  so  tliat  there  shall  be  no  more 
Orient  or  Occident.  It  were  interesting  to  dwell  on  the 
stages  of  this  grand  procession;  but  it  is  enougli,  on 
this  occasion,  merely  to  glance  at  .them  and  pass  on. 

Sir,  it  is  the  Pilgrims  that  we  commemorate  to-day, 


■cibyGoogIc 


FINGER-POINT  FROM  PLYMOUTH   ROCK.  271 

not  the  Senate.  For  this  moment,  at  least,  let  us  tread 
under  foot  all  pride  of  empire,  all  exultation  in  our 
manifold  triumphs  of  industry,  science,  literature,  with 
all  the  crowding  anticipations  of  the  vast  untold  Fu- 
ture, that  we  may  reverently  bow  before  the  Fore- 
fathers, The  day  is  theirs.  In  the  contemplation  of 
their  virtue  we  derive  a  lesson  which,  like  trath,  may 
judge  us  sternly,  but,  if  we  can  really  follow  it,  hke 
truth,  shall  make  us  free.  Por  myself,  I  accept  the 
admonition  of  the  day.  It  may  teach  us  all,  though 
few  in  numbers  or  alone,  never,  by  word  or  act,  to 
swerve  from  those  primal  principles  of  duty,  which, 
from  the  landing  on  Plymouth  Eock,  have  been  the  life 
of  Massachusetts.  Let  me  briefly  unfold  the  lesson,  — 
though  to  the  discerning  soul  it  unfolds  itself. 

Few  persons  in  history  have  suffered  more  from  con- 
temporary misrepresentation,  abuse,  and  persecution, 
than  the  EngHsh  Puritans.  At  first  a  small  body,  tliey 
were  regarded  with  indifference  and  contempt  But 
by  degrees  they  grew  in  numbers,  and  drew  into  their 
company  education,  intelligence,  and  even  rank.  Ee- 
formers  in  all  ages  have  had  little  of  blessing  from  the 
world  they  sought  to  serve.  But  the  Puritans  were 
not  disheartened.  Still  they  persevered.  The  obnox- 
ious laws  of  conformity  they  vowed  to  witlistand,  tUl,  in 
the  fervid  language  of  the  time,  "they  be  sent  back  to 
the  darkness  from  whence  they  came."  Through  them 
the  spirit  of  modern  Freedom  made  itself  potently  felt, 
in  great  warfare  with  Authority,  in  Church,  in  Litera- 
ture, and  in  State,  — ■  in  other  words,  for  religious,  intel- 
lectual, and  political  emancipation.  The  Puritans  prima- 
rily aimed  at  religious  freedom :  for  this  they  contend- 
ed in  Parliament,  under  Elizabeth  and  James ;  for  this 


■cibyGoogIc 


272  FINGER-rOINT   FEOM   PLYMOUTH  ROCK. 

they  suffered :  but,  so  connected  are  all  these  great  and 
glorious  interests,  that  tlie  stru^les  for  one  have  al- 
ways helped  the  others.  Such  service  did  they  do,  that 
Hume,  whose  cold  nature  sympathized  little  with  their 
burning  souls,  ia  obUged  to  confess  that  "  the  precious 
spark  of  Liberty  had  been  kindled  and  was  preserved 
by  the  Puritans  alone,"  and  he  adds,  that  "  to  this  sect 
the  Enghsh  owe  the  whole  freedom  of  their  Constitu- 
tion." 

As  among  all  reformers,  so  among  them  were  dif- 
ferences of  degrea  Some  continued  within  the  pale  of 
the  National  Church,  and  there  pressed  their  ineffectual 
attempts  in  behalf  of  the  good  cause.  Some  at  length, 
driven  by  conscientious  convictions,  and  unwiDiag  to 
be  partakers  longer  in  its  enormities,  stung  also  by 
cruel  excesses  of  magisterial  power,  openly  disclaimed 
the  National  Establishment,  and  became  a  separate  sect, 
first  imder  the  name  of  Brownists,  from  the  person  who 
led  in  this  new  oiganization,  and  then  under  the  better 
name  of  Separatists.  I  like  this  word.  Sir.  It  has  a 
meaning.!  After  long  strv^les  in  Parliament  and  out 
of  it,  in  Church  and  State,  prolonged  through  sacces- 
sive  reigns,  the  Puritans  finally  triumphed,  and  the  de- 
spised sect  of  Separatists,  swollen  in  numbers,  and  now 
imder  the  denomination  of  Independents,^  with  Oliver 
Cromwell  at  their  head  and  John  Milton  as  his  Secre- 
tary, ruled  England.  Thus  is  prefigured  the  final  tri- 
umph of  all,  however  few  in  numbers,  who  sincerely 
devote  themselves  to  Truth. 

The  Pilgrims  of  Plymouth  were  among  the  earliest  of 
the  Separatists.     As  such,  they  knew  by  bitter  experi- 


■cibyGooglc 


irrNGER-POlNT  FROM  PLYMOUTH  ROCK.  273 

ence  all  the  sharpness  of  persecution.  Against  them 
the  men  in  power  raged  like  the  heathen.  Against 
them  the  whole  fury  of  the  law  was  directed.  Some 
were  imprisoned,  all  were  impoverished,  wliile  their 
name  became  a  hy-word  of  reproach.  For  safety  and 
freedom  the  little  band  first  sought  shelter  in  Holland, 
where  they  continued  in  obscurity  and  indigence  for 
more  than  ten  years,  when  they  were  inspired  to  seek  a 
home  in  this  unknown  Western  world.  Such,  in  brief, 
is  their  history.  I  could  not  say  more  of  it  i,vithout  in- 
truding upon  your  time ;  I  could  not  say  less  without 
injustice  to  them. 

Barely  have  austere  principles  been  expressed  with 
more  gentleness  than  fi-om  their  lips.  By  a  covenant 
with  the  Lord,  they  had  vowed  to  walk  in  all  his  ways, 
according  to  their  best  endeavors,  whatsoemr  it  shcnUd 
cost  them,  —  and  also  to  receive  whatsoever  truth  should 
be  made  known  from  the  written  word  of  God.  Re- 
pentance and  prayers,  patience  and  tears,  were  their 
weapons.  "  It  is  not  with  us,"  said  they,  "  as  with  other 
men,  whom  small  things  can  discourage  or  small  dis- 
contentments cause  to  wish  themselves  at  home  again." 
And  then  ^ain,  on  another  occasion,  their  souls  were 
lifted  to  utterance  like  this:  "When  we  are  in  our 
graves,  it  will  be  all  one,  whether  we  have  lived  in 
plenty  or  penury,  whether  we  have  died  in  a  bed  of 
down  or  on  locks  of  straw."  Self-sacrifice  is  never  in 
vain,  and  with  the  clearness  of  prophecy  they  foresaw 
that  out  of  tlieir  triak  should  come  a  transcendent  Fu- 
ture. "As  one  smaU  candle,"  said  an  early  Pilgrim 
Governor,  "  may  light  a  thousand,  so  the-  light  kindled 
here  may  in  some  sort  shine  even  to  the  whole  nation." 
And  these  utterances  were  crowned  by  the  testimony  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


27i  FINGER-POINT  FROM  PLYMOUTH  EOCK. 

the  English  governor  and  historian,  whose  sympathy  for 
them  was  as  Kttle  as  that  of  Hume  i'or  the  Puritans,  con- 
fessing it  doubtful "  whether  Britam  would  have  had  any 
colonies  m  America  at  this  day,  if  religion  had  not  been 
the  grand  uiducement,"— thus  honoring  our  Pilgrims. 

And  yet  these  men,  with  sudi  auhlime  endurance, 
lofty  faith,  and  admirable  achievement,  are  among  those 
sometimes  called  "Puritan  knaves"  and  " knaves-Puri- 
tans," and  openly  branded  by  King  James  as  "very 
peats  in  the  Church  and  Commowealth."  The  small 
company  of  our  forefathers  became  jest  and  gibe  of 
fashion  and  power.  The  phrase  "  men  of  one  idea"  was 
not  invented  then ;  but,  in  ec[mvalent  language,  they 
were  styled  "the  pinched  fanatics  of  leyden."  A 
contemporary  poet  and  favorite  of  Charles  the  First, 
Thomas  Carew,  lent  his  genius  to  their  defamation.  A 
masque,  from  his  elegant  and  careful  pen,  was  per- 
formed by  the  monarch  and  his  coiutiers,  turning  the 
whole  plantation  of  New  England  to  royal  sport.  The 
jeer  broke  forth  in  the  exclamation,  that  it  had  "  purged 
more  virulent  humors  from  the  politic  body  than  gua- 
iacum  and  all  the  West  Indian  drugs  have  from  the 
natural  bodies  of  this  kii^dom."i 

And  these  outcasts,  despised  m  their  own  day  by  the 
proud  and  great,  are  the  men  whom  we  have  met  m 
this  goodly  number  to  celebrate,  —  not  for  any  victory  of 
-(var,  —  not  for  any  triumph  of  discovery,  science,  learn- 
in",' or  eloquence,  — not  for  worldly  success  of  any  kind. 
How  poor  are  aU  these  things  by  the  side  of  that  divine 
virtue  which,  amidst  the  reproach,  the  obloquy,  and  tho 
hardness  of  the  world,  made  them  hold  fast  to  Pree- 

l  This  masqne,  entitled  Gfhai  BrUunakum,  was  performed  ftt  Wliitcliall, 
FBbruiuj  18, 1833. 


■cibyGoogIc 


riNGEB-POlNT  FEOM  PLYMOUTH  EOCK  275 

doin  and  Truth  I  Sir,  if  the  honors  of  this  day  are  not 
a  mockery,  if  they  do  not  expend  themselves  in  mere 
self-gratuiation,  if  they  are  a  sincere  homage  to  the 
character  of  the  Pilgrims,  —  and  I  cannot  suppose  oth- 
erwise,—  then  is  it  well  for  us  to  be  here.  Standing 
on  Plymouth  Eock,  at  their  great  anniversary,  we  can- 
not fail  to  he  elevated  by  their  example.  We  see  clear- 
ly what  it  has  done  for  the  world,  and  what  it  has  done 
for  their  fame.  No  pnsiUanimons  soul  here  to-day  will 
declare  then-  self-sacrifice,  their  deviation  from  received 
opinions,  their  unc[uenchable  tliirst  for  liberty,  an  error 
or  illusion.  From  gushmg  multitudinous  hearts  we 
now  thank  these  lowly  men  that  they  dared  to  be  true 
and  brave.  Conformity  or  compromise  might,  perhaps, 
have  purchased  for  them  a  profitable  peace,  but  not 
peace  of  mind ;  it  might  have  secured  place  and  power, 
but  not  repose;  it  m^ht  have  opened  present  shelter, 
but  not  a  home  in  history  and  in  men's  hearts  till  time 
shall  be  no  more.  All  must  confess  the  true  grandeur  of 
their  example,  while,  in  vindication  of  a  cherished  prin- 
ciple, they  stood  alone,  ^inst  the  madness  of  men, 
agauist  the  law  of  the  land,  against  their  king.  Better 
the  despised  Pilgrim,  a  fugitive  for  freedom,  than  the 
halting  politician,  forgetful  of  principle,  "with  a  Senate 
at  his  heels." 

Such,  Sir,  is  the  voice  from  Plymouth  Eock,  as  it  sa- 
lutes my  ears.  Others  may  not  hear  it;  but  to  me 
it  comes  in  tones  which  I  cannot  mistake,  I  catch  its 
words  of  noble  cheer :  — 

"Saw  oooHBlons  teach  new  duties;  Time  makes  nnciant  goodnneoutlii 
They  must  upward  still  and  onward  who  would  Iteep  abreast  of  Truth : 
Lo,  before  ua  gleam  her  camp-tires!  we  ourselves  must  Piigrima  he, 
LauQoh  our  Mayflower,  and  steer  boldly  through  the  desperate  winter  sea." 


■cibyGoogIc 


lEELAHD  AHD  IRISHMEN. 

Letter  to  a  Committee  of  Ikise-bobn  Cimzens,  August  2,  1853. 


Boston,  August  2,  1S53. 

GENTLEMEN, —  It  is  not  in  mj  power  to  "be  with 
you  on  the  evening  of  the  celebration  at  FaneuU 
Hall,  but,  I  pray  you,  do  not  consider  me  insensible  to 
the  honor  of  your  invitation. 

Permit  me  to  say  that  no  country  excites  a  generous 
sympathy  more  than  Ireland ;  nor  is  any  society  more 
genial  and  winning  than  that  of  Irishmen. 

BeUeve  me.  Gentlemen,  faithfully  yours, 

Chaeles  Sumser 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  LANDMARK  OF  FREEDOM: 

HO  EEPEAL  OF  THE  MISSOUEI  COIPEOIISB. 


Speech   in   the  Senate,   asainst  the  Repeai.   of   ' 

PiioniBinoN  OF  Slavery  hohth  of  36°  30'  in  tue  Nkbeaska 
AND  Kansas  Bill,  Febbtaky  21,  1854. 


Cursed  be  he  Umt  ramoTeth  hia  neighbor's  landmark.    And  all  the  ptiiple 
AnUias,  -Amea.  —  Dbutehohomy,  ssvil.  11. 


■cibyGoogIc 


;db,Googlc 


"The  ITebniska  Debate,"  as  it  was  called  at  the  time,  was  ovi 
the  most  remarkable  in  our  history.  It  grew  out  of  the  propositioi 
overturn  the  famous  Missouri  Compromise,  so  as  to  admit  Slavery  i 
the  vast  ■territory  west  of  the  Mississippi,  where  it  had  been  p: 
by  that  Compromise.  The  country  was  startled  by  the  outrage.  Many 
who  had  tried  to  reconcile  themselves  to  the  ^Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  as 
required  by  tbe  Constitution,  were  maddened  by  this  most  audacious 
attempt.  Even  assuming  that  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill  was  in  any 
sense  jnatifiable,  there  was  nothing  to  Juslify  this  flagrant  violation  of 
plighted  faith,  where  Slavery  was  the  inexorable  robber.  Here  began 
those  heats  wMeh  afterwards  showed  themselves  in  blood.  Never  was 
the  action  of  Congress  watched  with  more  anxiety.  Speeches  were  read 
as  never  before,  especiaEy  those  opposed  to  this  new  aggression.  That 
of  Mr.  Sumner  was  cKtensively  circulated  in  various  editions,  and  he 
received  numerous  letters  expressing  sympathy  and  gratitude.  The 
tone  of  these  illuati'ates  the  reception  of  the  speech.  The  late  Eufus 
W.  Griswold,  so  well  known  in  contemporary  literature,  wrote  from 
New  York  on  the  day  after  its  delivery :  "The  admirable  speech  which 
you  delivered  in  the  Senate  yesterday  will  bring  you  a  wearying  quan- 
tity of  approving  letters ;  but,  though  aware  of  this,  I  cannot  refrain 
from  assuring  you  of  my  own  admiration  of  it  and  giatituda  for  it,  nor 
from  telling  you  that  dl  through  the  city  it  appears  to  be  the  subject 

of  applauding  conversation I  congratulate  you  on  having  made 

a  speech  so  worthy  of  an  American  Senator,  and  calculated  to  be  so 
serviceable  to  the  cause  of  Liberty."  Frederick  Douglass,  who  watched 
the  contest  from  a  distance  with  the  interest  of  a  former  slave,  wi'Ote  ; 
"  All  the  friends  of  Fi'eedom  in  everyStateandof  every  color  may  claim 
you  just  now  as  their  representative.  As  one  of  your  sable  constitu- 
ents, I  desire  to  thank  you  for  yonr  noble  speech  for  Freedom  and  for 
your  country,  which  I  have  now  read  twice  over."  An  original  Aboli- 
tionist wrote  :  "  Let  me  thank  yon  from  my  heart  of  hearts  for  your 
noble  speech.  It  is  everything  tliat  we  could  wish,  —  bold,  free,  and 
true.  God  will  sutely  bless  you  ! "  The  feeling  of  the  hour  appeared 
also  in  the  following  from  John  G.  Whittier :  "  I  am  unused  to  flatter 
any  one,  least  of  all  one  whom  I  bve  and  honor ;  but  I  must  say,  in 
all  sincerity,  that  there  is  no  orator  or  statesman  living  in  this  country 


■cibyGoogIc 


280  THE   LANDMARK   OF   FREEDOM: 

or  in  Europe  whose  fame  is  so  great  as  not  to  derive  additional  lustre 
ftom  Huch  a  epeech.  It  will  Eve  the  full  life  of  American  history." 
Professor  C.  S.  Hemy,  of  the  Kew  York  University,  wrote :  "  1  thank 
you  for  jour  noble  speech  on  the  Eebraaka  BilL  In  every  quality  of 
nobleness  tranaoendently  noble.  Unsurpassed  in  tone  and  temper,  — 
niuivalled  in  impregnable  soundness  and  judicious  statement  of  posi- 
tions, ill  eleamess  and  logical  force  of  historical  recital,  ii 
ness  of  reasoning,  in  beautiful  Stness  of  style,  and  in  the  ti 
of  a  justice-loving  soul."  Among  the  curiosities  of  praise,  considering 
the  political  position  of  the  writer,  was  a  letter  &om  Pierre  Soule,  our 
minister  at  Madrid,  and  formerly  Senator  from  Louisiana,  containing 
the  following  passage :  "  Que  je  prohte  de  cette  occasion  pour  vous  dire 
combieu  j'ai  et^  heurem  du  snccis,  et  pour  miens  dire,  du  triomphe 
iclafant  que  TOUfi  avez  obtenti  b,  I'occasion  de  votre  disconrs  sur  le  Ne- 
hraaka  B^l.  Courage !  Sic  tfur  ad  astra  Mais  que  dis-je  ?  Tons  y 
Stesdiji,  et  habile  qui  itesiiait  lous  en  dcloj,ei."  These  ate  exam- 
ples only  i  but  they  help  to  exhil  it  the  c  >  i  lition  of  the  public  mind. 
The  Forth  was  aroused,  and  felt  as  noei  lefore  towards  those  who 
spoke  in  its  behalf. 

The  origin  of  the  debate  will  appear  fiom  a  statement  of  facts. 

On  the  14th  of  December,  1853,  Mr.  Dodge,  of  Iowa,  asked  and  ob- 
tained leave  t«  intiiDdnce  a  bill  to  oiganize  the  Territory  of  Nebraska, 
which  was  read  a  first  and  second  time  by  unanimous  consent  and  re- 
ferred to  the  Committee  on  Territories.  This  was  a  simple  Territorial 
BUI,  in  the  common  form,  containing  no  allusion  to  Slavery,  and  not 
in  any  way  undertaking  to  tonch  the  existing  Prohibition  of  Slavery  in 
this  Territory. 

On  the  *th  of  January,  1854,  Mr.  Douglas,  of  Illinois,  as  Chairman 
of  the  Committee  on  Territories,  reported  this  bill  back  to  the  Senata 
with  various  amendments,  accompanied  by  a  special  report  By  this 
bin  only  a  single  Territory  was  constituted,  under  the  name  of  Ne- 
braska; the  existing  Prohibition  of  Slavery  was  not  directly  over- 
thrown, but  it  was  declared  that  the  States  formed  out  of  this  Territory 
should  be  admitted  into  the  Union  "with  orwithout  Slavery,"  as  they 
should  desire. 

On  the  16th  of  January,  Mr.  Dixon,  of  Kentucky,  in  order  to  ac- 
complish directly  what  the  bill  did  only  indirectly,  gave  notice  of 
an  amendment,  to  the  effect  that  the  existing  Prohibition  of  Slavery 
"shall  not  be  so  construed  as  to  apply  to  the  Territory  contemplated 
by  this  Act,  or  to  any  other  Tenitory  of  the  United  States ;  but  that 
the  citizens  of  the  sevei-al  States  or  Territories  shall  be  at  liberty  to 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   EEPEAL  OF   THE  MISSOURI  COMPIiOJIISE.        281 

take  and  hold,  llieif  slaves  witliin  any  of  the  Territories  of  tlio  United 
States,  or  of  the  States  to  be  formed  therefrom." 

On  the  next  day,  Jannary  17,  Mr.  Sumner,  in  order  to  preatiTO  tlie 
existing  Piuhibition,  gave  notice  of  the  following  amendment. 

"  Pr<mded,  That  nothing  herein  contained  ehall  be  conslmed  to  abrogiUe 
or  in  any  way  contravene  the  Act  of  March  6, 1620,  eiititled  '  An  Act  to  au- 
thorize the  people  of  MisBoari  Terrilsry  to  form  a  Constitution  anil  Stnte 
Goyemment,  and  for  the  admission  of  such  State  into  the  Union  on  an  equal 
footing  with  the  original  Stal«s,  and  to  prohibit  Slavery  in  certain  Terri- 
tories ' ;  wherein  it  is  expressly  enacted,  '  that  in  that  territory  ceded  by 
France  to  the  United  States,  under  the  name  of  Louisiana,  which  lies  north 
of  thirty-six  degrees  and  thirty  minut«B  north  latitude,  not  included  within 
the  limits  of  Uie  State  contemplated  by  this  Act,  slavery  and  involuntaiy 
servitude,  otherwise  than  in  the  punishment  of  crimes,  whereof  tlie  parties 
shall  have  been  duly  convicted,  shall  be,  and  is  hereby,  forever  prohibited.'" 

It  ia  worthy  of  remaA,  that  at  this  stage  the  pitipoaition  of  Mr.  Dixon, 
and  also  that  of  Mr.  Sumner,  were  equally  condemned  by  the  Washing- 
toTi,  Uiwm,  the  official  organ  of  the  Administration.  It  had  not  then 
been  det«nuiiied  to  sostain  the  repeal. 

On  the  28d  of  January,  Mr.  Douglas,  from  the  Committee  on  Terri- 
tories, submitted  a  new  bill,  as  a  substitatc  for  that  already  reported. 
Here  was  a  sudden  change,  by  which  the  TeiTitory  was  divided  into 
two,  Nahraska  and  Kansas,  and  the  Prohihition  of  Slavery  was  directly 
overthrown.  According  to  his  language  at  the  time,  there  were  "  incor- 
porated into  it  one  or  two  other  amendments,  which  make  the  provis- 
ions of  the  bill  upon  other  and  more  delicate  queationa  mora  clear  and 
specific,  so  as  to  avoid  all  conflict  of  opinion."  It  was  formaOy  enun- 
ciated in  the  bill,  that  the  Prohibition  of  Slavery  "was  superseded  by 
the  principles  of  the  legislation  of  1850,  commonly  called  the  Compro- 
mise Measures,  and  is  hereby  declared  inoperative."  This  of  course 
superseded  the  proposed  amendment  of  Mr.  Dixon,  who  subsequently 
declared  his  entire  assent  to  the  bill  in  its  new  form.  It  also  presented 
the  issue  directly  raised  in  Mr.  Sumner's  proposed  amendment. 

On  the  next  day,  January  a4th,  when  the  amended  hill  had  just 
been  laid  upon  the  tables  of  Senators,  and  without  allowing  the  ne- 
cessary time  even  for  its  perusal,  Mr.  Douglas  pressed  its  considera- 
tion upon  the  Senate.  After  some  debate  it  was  x>ostponed  untdl  the 
30th  of  January,  and  made  the  special  order  from  day  to  day  until  dis- 
posed of. 

Meanwhile  an  appeal  to  the  country  was  put  forth  by  a  few  Senators 
and  Representatives  in  Congress,  calling  themselves  Independent  Dem- 
ocrats.    The  only  Senators  who  signed  this  appeal  were  Mr.  Chase  and 


;db,Googlc 


282  THE   LANDMARK    OF   FREEDOM: 

Mr.  Sumner.  It  was  entitled,  "Shall  SlaTery  he  peiinitted  In  ITe- 
biBfika ! "  and  proceeded  in  stcoi^  langnage  to  expose  the  violation  ot 
plighted  faith  and  the  wickedness  ahout  to  he  perj^trated.  This  docu- 
ment was  extensively  circulated,  and  did  much  to  awaken  the  public. 

On  the  30th  of  January  the  Senate  pioeeeded  to  the  constdei'ation  of 
the  bill,  when  Mr.  Douglas  took  the  floor  and  devoted  himself  to  de- 
nunciation of  the  appeal  by  the  Independent  Democrats,  characterizing 
its  authoii?  aa  "Abolition  confederates,"  and  iiarticularly  arraigning 
Mr.  Chase  and  Mr.  Sumner,  the  two  Senators  who  had  signed  it. 
When  he  sat  down,  Mr.  Chase  replied  at  once  to  the  personal  matters 
introduced,  and  was  followed  by  Mr.  Sumner,  in  the  few  remai'ks  be- 
low ;  and  this  was  the  openmg  of  the  great  debate  which  occupied  for 
months  tlie  attention  o£  the  country. 

Me.  President,  —  Before  the  Senate  adjourns  I  crave 
a  single  moment  As  a  signer  of  the  address  referred 
to  by  the  Senator  from  Illinois  [Mr.  Douglas],  I  open- 
ly accept,  before  the  Senate  and  the  country,  my  full 
responsibility  for  it,  and  deprecate  no  criticism  from 
any  quarter.  That  document  was  put  forth  in  the  dis- 
chai^e  of  a  high  public  duty,  —  on  the  precipitate  intro- 
duction into  this  body  of  a  measure  which,  as  seems 
to  me,  is  not  only  subversive  of  an  ancient  landmark, 
but  hostile  to  the  peace,  the  harmony,  and  the  best  in- 
terests of  the  country.  But,  Sir,  in  doing  this,  I  judged 
the  act,  and  not  its  author.  I  saw  only  the  enormous 
proposition,  and  nothing  of  the  Senator. 

The  language  \tsed  is  stroi^,  but  not  stronger  than 
the  exigency  required.  Here  is  a  measure  winch  re- 
verses the  time-honored  pohcy  of  our  fathers  in  the 
restriction  of  Slavery,  —  which  sets  aside  the  Missouri 
Compromise,  a  solemn  compact,  by  which  all  the  ter- 
ritory ceded  by  France  under  the  name  of  Louisiana, 
north  of  thirty-six  degrees  and  thirty  minutes  noi-th 
latitude  and  not  included  within  the  limits  of  Missom-i, 
was  "forever"  consecrated  to  Freedom,  —  and  which 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   EEPIAL   OF  THE  MISSOUEI  COMPROMISE.       283 

violates,  also,  the  alleged  compromises  of  1850  :  and  all 
this  opening  an  immense  territory  to  Slavery.  Such 
a  measure  cannot  be  regarded  without  emotions  too 
stroi^  for  speech ;  nor  can  it  be  justly  described  in 
common  language.  It  is  a  soulless,  eyeless  monster, — 
horrid,  unshapely,  vast :  and  this  monster  is  now  let 
loose  upon  the  country. 

AUow  me  one  other  word  of  explanation.  It  is  true 
I  desired  that  the  consideration  of  this  measure  should 
not  be  pressed  at  once,  with  indecent  haste,  as  was  pro- 
posed, even  before  the  Senate  could  read  the  bill  in 
which  it  is  embodied.  You  may  remember  that  the 
Missouri  Bill,  as  appears  from  the  Journals  of  Congress, 
when  first  introduced,  in  Decembei',  1819,  was  allowed 
to  rest  upon  the  table  nearly  two  months  before  the  ■ 
discussion  commenced  The  proposition  to  undo  the 
only  part  of  tliat  work  which  is  now  in  any  degree 
within  the  reach  of  Congress  should  be  approached  with 
even  greater  caution  and  reserve.  The  people  have  a 
right  to  be  heard  on  this  monstrous  scheme ;  and  there 
is  no  apology  for  that  driving,  galloping  speed  which 
shall  anticipate  their  voice,  and,  in  its  conseq^uences, 
must  despoil  them  of  this  right. 

The  debate  was  continued  from  day  to  day.  On  the  7th  of  Fcliruary 
Mr.  Douglas  proposed  still  another  change  in  his  bill.  There  seemed 
to  he  a  perpetual  difficulty  in  adjusting  the  language  by  wliioh  the  ex- 
isting Prohibition  of  Slavery  should  he  OTertlii-own.  He  now  moTed 
to  strike  out  the  words  referring  to  this  Proliihition,  and  to  insert  the 
following ;  — 

"Which,  beinic  inconsistent  with  the  principles  of  non-intervention  by 
Congress  with  Slavery  in  the  States  and  Territories,  as  recognized  by  the 
legislation  of  18B0,  commonly  called  the  Compromise  Measures,  is  hereby 
declared  inoperative  and  void :  it  being  the  trna  intent  and  meaning  of  this 
Act  not  to  le^slate  Slavery  into  any  Territory  or  State,  nor  to  esolnde  it 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  LAKDMAEK   OF  FKEEDOM. 


Btitution  of  the  United  States." 

On  the  ISth  of  Febnialy  this  amendment  was  adopted  "by  a  vote  of 
thirty-five  yeas  to  ten  naya.  Tho  debate  was  then  continued  upon  the 
pending  subatitute  reported  by  the  Committee  for  the  original  bill. 

On  the  21st  of  February  Mr.  Sumner  took  the  floor  and  delivered 
the  following  speech. 


■cibyGoogIc 


SPEECH. 


MK,  PRESIDENT, — I  approach  this  discussion  with 
awe.  The  mighty  question,  with  untold  issues, 
oppi-esses  me.  Like  a  portentous  cloud  surcharged  with 
irresistible  storm  and  ruin,  it  seems  to  fill  the  whole 
heavens,  making  me  painfully  conscious  how  unec[ual 
to  the  occasion  I  am,  —  how  uneq^ual,  also,  is  all  that  I 
can  aay  to  all  that  I  feeL 

In  delivering  my  sentiments  to-day  I  shall  spealf 
frankly,  according  to  my  convictions,  without  conceal- 
ment or  reserve.  If  anything  fell  from  the  Senator 
from  lUJnois  [Mi.  Douglas],  in  opening  this  discussion, 
which  might  seem  to  challenge  a  personal  contest,  I 
desire  to  say  that  I  shall  not  enter  upon  it.  Let  not 
a  word  or  a  tone  pass  my  lipa  to  divert  attention  for 
a  moment  from  the  surpassing  theme,  hy  the  side  of 
which  Senators  and  Presidents  are  but  dwarfs.  I  would 
not  foi^et  those  amenities  which  belong  to  this  place, 
and  are  so  well  calculated  to  temper  tlie  antagonism 
of  debate ;  nor  can  I  cease  to  remember,  and  to  feel, 
that,  amidst  all  diversities  of  opinion,  we  are  the  rep- 
resentatives of  thirty-one  sister  republics,  knit  to- 
gether by  indissoluble  ties,  and  constituting  that  Plu- 
ral Unit  which  we  all  embrace  by  the  endearing  name 
of  country. 


■cibyGoogIc 


286  THE  LANDMAEK  OF  FREEDOM: 

The  q^uestion  for  your  consideration  is  not  exceeded 
in  grandeur  by  any  wliich  1ms  occurred  in  our  national 
history  since  the  Declaration  of  Independence.  In  ev- 
ery aspect  it  assumes  gigantic  proportions,  whether  we 
consider  simply  the  extent  of  territory  it  affects,  or 
the  pnhMc  faith  and  national  policy  which  it  assails,  or 
that  higher  q^uestion  —  that  Question  of  Questions,  as  fer 
above  others  as  Liberty  is  above  the  common  things  of 
life  —  which  it  opens  anew  for  judgment. 

It  concerns  an  immense  region,  laiger  than  the  origi- 
nal Thirteen  States,  vying  in  extent  with  aU  the  existing 
Free  States, ^stretching  over  prairie,  field,  and  forest, — 
interlaced  by  silver  streams,  sliirted  by  protecting  moun- 
tains, and  constituting  the  heart  of  the  North  American 
continent, — only  a  little  smaller,  let  me  add,  than  three 
great  European  countries  combined,  —  Italy,  Spain,  and 
France,  —  each  of  which,  in  succession,  has  dominated 
over  the  globe.  This  territory  lias  been  Utened,  on  this 
iloor,  to  the  Garden  of  God.  Tlie  similitude  is  found 
not  merely  in  its  pure  and  viigin  character,  but  in  its 
actual  geographical  situation,  occupyii^  central  spaces 
on  this  hemisphere,  which,  in  their  general  relations, 
may  well  compare  with  that  "  happy  rural  seat."  We 
are  told  that 

"  SoulhwHid  throngh  Eden  went  a  river  large": 
SO  here  a  stream  flows  southward  which  is  larger  than 
the  Euphrates.  And  here,  too,  all  amid  the  smiling 
products  of  Nature,  lavished  by  the  hand  of  God,  is  the 
lofty  Tree  of  Liberty,  planted  by  our  fathers,  which, 
without  exaggeration,  or  even  imagination,  may  be  lik- 
ened to 

"thaTfeeofLifa, 
High  eminent,  blooming  ambfosial  fruit 
Of  vegetable  gold." 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   EEPEAL    OF    THE   MISSOUSI    COMPEOMISE.        28V 

It  13  with  regard  to  this  territory  that  you  are  now 
called  to  exercise  the  grandest  function  of  lawgiver,  by 
establishing  rules  of  polity  which  will  determine  its 
future  character.  As  the  twig  is  bent  the  tree  inclines ; 
and  the  influences  impressed  upon  the  early  days  of  an 
empire,  lite  those  upon  a  child,  are  of  inconceivable 
importance  to  its  future  weal  or  woe.  The  bill  now 
before  us  proposes  to  oi^nize  and  equip  two  new  ter- 
ritorial establishments,  with  Governors,  Secretaries,  Le- 
gislative Councils,  Legislators,  Judges,  Marshals,  and 
the  whole  machinery  of  civil  society.  Such  a  measure 
at  any  time  would  deserve  the  most  careful  attention. 
But  at  the  present  moment  it  justly  excites  peculiar 
interest,  from  the  effort  made  —  on  pretences  unsus- 
tained  by  facts,  in  violation  of  soleirm  covenant,  and 
in  disr^ard  of  the  early  principles  of  our  fathers  —  to 
open  this  immense  region  to  Slavery. 

Accordii^  to  existing  law,  this  territory  is  now 
guarded  against  Slavery  by  a  positive  Prohibition,  em- 
bodied in  the  Act  of  Congress  approved  March  6th, 
1820,  preparatory  to  the  admission  of  Missouri  into  the 
Union  as  a  sister  State,  aud  in  the  following  explicit 
words :  — 

"Seo.  8.  And  he  it  further  emacted,  That  in  all  that  ter- 
ritory (xded  by  France  to  the  United  States,  under  the  name 
of  Louisiana,  which  hes  north  of  thirty-six  degrees  and  thir- 
ty minutes  north  latitude,  not  included  within  the  Hmits  of 
the  State  contemplated  by  this  Act,  elaveet  ahd  htvolun- 
TARY  SERVITUDE,  Otherwise  thau  in  tho  punishment  of  crimes, 
whereof  the  parties  shall  have  been  duly  convicted,  shall 
BE,  AND  IS  HEBBBT,  FOREVER  PROHIBITED." 

It  is  now  proposed  to  set  aside  this  Prohibition.  But 
there  seems  to  be  a  singular  indecision  as  to  the  way 


■cibyGoogIc 


288  THE  ULNDMABK  OF  FREEDOM: 

in  which  the  deed  shall  be  done.  From  the  time  of  its 
first  intiodnction,  in  the  Report  of  the  Conunittee  on  Ter- 
ritories, the  proposition  has  assumed  different  shapes ; 
and  it  promises  to  assume  as  many  as  Proteus,  —  now 
one  thing  in  form,  and  now  another,  —  now  like  a  ser- 
pent, and  then  like  a  lion,  ■ —  hut  in  every  form  and  shape 
identical  in  substance;  with  but  one  object, — -the  over- 
throw of  the  Prohibition  of  Slavery.  At  first  it  pro- 
posed simply  to  declare  that  the  States  formed  out  of 
this  territory  should  he  admitted  into  the  Union  "with 
Or  without  Slavery,"  and  did  not  directly  assume  to 
touch  this  Prohibition.  For  some  reason  this  was  not 
satisfactory,  and  then  it  was  precipitately  proposed  to 
declare  that  the  Prohibition  in  the  Missouri  Act  "  was 
superseded  by  tlie  principles  of  the  legislation  of  1850, 
commonly  called  the  Compromise  Measures,  and  is 
hereby  declared  inoperative."  But  this  would  not  do ; 
and  it  is  now  proposed  to  enact,  that  the  Prohibition, 
"beii^  inconsistent  with  the  principles  of  non-inter- 
vention by  Congress  with  Slavery  in  the  Sta,tes  and 
Territories,  as  recognized  by  the  legislation  of  1850, 
commonly  called  the  Compromise  Measures,  is  hereby 
declared  inoperative  and  void." 

AU  this  is  to  be  done  on  pretences  founded  upon  the 
Slaveiy  enactments  of  1850.  Now,  Sir,  I  am  not  here 
to  speak  in  behalf  of  those  measures,  or  to  lean  in  any 
way  upon  their  support.  Eelatii^  to  different  subject- 
matters,  contained  in  different  acts,  which  prevailed 
successively,  at  different  times,  and  by  different  votes, 
—  some  persons  voting  for  one,  and  some  for  another, 
and  very  few  for  all,  —  they  cannot  he  regarded  as  a 
unit,  embodying  conditions  of  compact,  or  compromise, 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO  HEPEAL  OF  THE  MISSOURI   COMPEOMISE.        280 

if  you  please,  adopted  eq^ually  by  all,  and  tlierefore  obli- 
gatory on  alL  But  since  this  broken  series  of  measures 
is  adduced  aa  apology  for  the  proposition  now  before 
us,  I  desire  to  say,  that,  such  as  they  are,  they  cannot, 
by  any  rule  of  interpretation,  by  any  charming  rod  of 
power,  by  any  magic  alchemy,  be  transmuted  into  a  re- 
peal of  that  original  Prohibition. 

On  this  head  there  are  several  points  to  which  I 
would  merely  call  attention,  and  then  pass  on.  First : 
The  Slavery  enactments  of  1850  did  not  pretend,  in 
terms,  to  touch,  much  less  to  change,  the  condition  of 
the  Louisiana  Territory,  which  was  already  fixed  by 
Congressional  enactment.  The  two  transactions  related 
to  different  subject-matters.  Secondly :  The  enactments 
do  not  directly  touch  the  subject  of  Slavery,  during  the 
Territorial  existence  of  Utah  and  New  Mexico;  but 
they  provide  prospectively,  that,  when  admitted  as 
States,  they  shall  be  received  "  with  or  without  Slavery." 
Here  certainly  can  be  no  overthrow  of  an  Act  of  Con- 
gress which  directly  concerns  a  Territory  during  its  Ter- 
ritorial existcTice.  Thirdly:  During  all  the  discussion 
of  these  measures  in  Congress,  and  aft-erwards  before 
the  people,  and  through  the  public  press,  at  the  North 
and  the  South  alike,  no  person  was  heard  to  intiroate 
that  the  Prohibition  of  Slavery  in  the  Missouri  Act  was 
in  any  way  disturbed.  Fourthly:  The  acts  themselves 
contain  a  formal  provision,  that  "nothing  herein  con- 
tained shall  be  construed  to  impair  or  cLualify  any- 
thing" in  a  certain  article  of  the  Eesolution  annexing 
Texas,  where  it  is  expressly  declared,  that,  in  any  State 
formed  out  of  territory  north  of  the  Missouri  Compro- 
mise line,  "  Slavery  or  invohratary  servitude,  except  for 
crime,  shall  be  prohibited." 


■cibyGoogIc 


290  THE   LANDMAEK    OF   FREEDOM  : 

I  do  not  dwell  on  these  things.  Tfiese  pretences  have 
heen  amply  refuted  lay  ahle  Senators  who  have  preceded 
me.  It  is  clear,  beyond  contradiction,  that  the  Prohibi- 
tion of  Slavery  iu  this  Territory  was  not  superseded,  or 
in  any  way  contravened,  by  the  Slavery  Acts  of  1850. 
The  proposition  before  you  is,  therefore,  original  in 
character,  without  sanction  from  any  former  legislation, 
and  it  must,  accordingly,  be  ju<^ed  by  its  merits,  as  an 
original  proposition. 

Here,  Sir,  let  it  be  remembered  that  the  friends  of 
^Freedom  are  not  open  to  any  chai'ge  of  aggression.  They 
are  now  standing  on  the  defensive,  guarding  the  early 
intrenchments  thrown  up  by  our  fathers.  No  proposi- 
tion to  abolish  Slavery  anywhere  is  now  before  you, 
but,  on  the  contrary,  a  proposition  to  abolish  Freedom. 
The  term  Abohtionist,  so  often  applied  in  reproach,  justly 
belongs,  on  this  occasion,  to  him  who  would  overthrow 
this  well-established  landmark.  He  is,  indeed,  no  Abo- 
litionist of  Slavery ;  let  him  be  called,  Sir,  Abolitionist 
of  Freedom.  For  myself,  whether  with  many  or  few, 
my  place  is  taken.  Even  if  alone,  my  feeble  arm  should 
not  be  -wanting  as  a  bar  against  this  outrage. 

On  two  distinct  grounds,  "  atror^  both  against  the 
deed,"  I  arraign  it :  First,  in  the  name  of  Pi.iblic  Faith, 
as  an  infraction  of  solemn  oblations,  assumed  beyond 
recall  by  the  South,  on  the  admission  of  Missouri  into 
the  Union  as  a  Slave  State.  Secondly,  I  arraign  it  in 
the  name  of  Freedom,  as  an  imjustifiable  departure  from 
the  original  Antislavery  pohcy  of  our  fathers.  Tliese 
two  heads  I  shall  consider  in  their  order,  glancing,  un- 
der the  latter,  at  the  objections  to  the  Prohibition  of 
Slavery  in  the  Territories. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   EEPEAL   OF  THE  MISSOUEI  COMPROMISE.        291 

Before  I  approach  the  argument,  indulge  me  with  a 
few  preliminary  words  on  the  character  of  this  proposi- 
tion. Slavery  is  the  forcible  suhjeetion  of  one  human 
being,  in  person,  labor,  and  property,  to  the  will  of  an- 
other. In  this  simple  statement  is  involved  its  whole 
injustice.  There  is  no  offence  f^iiist  religion,  against 
morals,  agaiixst  humanity,  which,  in  the  Ueense  of  this 
enormity,  may  not  stalk  "  unwhipped  of  justice."  For 
the  husband  and  wife  there  is  no  marriage ;  for  the  moth- 
er there  is  no  assurance  that  her  infant  child  wiU  not 
be  ravished  from  her  breast ;  for  all  who  bear  the  name 
of  Slave  there  is  nothing  that  they  can  call  their  own. 
Without  a  father,  without  a  mother,  almost  without  a 
God,  the  slave  has  nothing  but  a  master.  It  would  be 
contrary  to  that  Eule  of  Eight  which  is  ordained  by  God, 
if  such  a  system,  though  mitigated  often  by  patriarchal 
kindness,  and  by  plausible  physical  comfort,  could  be 
otherwise  than  pernicious.  It  is  confessed  that  the 
master  suffers  not  less  than  the  slave.  And  this  is  not 
all.  The  whole  social  fabric  is  disorganized ;  labor  loses 
its  dignity ;  industry  sickens ;  education  finds  no  schools ; 
and  all  the  land  of  Slavery  is  impoverished.  And  now. 
Sir,  when  the  conscience  of  mankind  is  at  last  aroused 
to  these  things,  when,  throughout  the  civilized  world, 
a  slave-dealer  is  a  by-word  and  a  reproach,  we,  as  a  na- 
tion, are  about  to  open  a  new  market  to  the  traffickers 
in  flesh  that  haunt  the  shambles  of  the  South.  Such 
an  act,  at  this  time,  is  removed  from  all  reach  of  that 
palliation  often  vouchsafed  to  Slavery.  This  ittong,  we 
are  speciously  told  by  those  who  seek  to  defend  it,  is 
not  our  original  sin.  It  was  entailed  upon  us,  so  we  are 
instructed,  by  our  ancestors ;  and  tlie  responsibility  is 
often  thrown,  witli  exultation,  upon  the  mother  conn- 


■cibyGooglc 


292  THE  LANDMAKK  OF  FKEEDOM  : 

try.  Now,  without  stopping  to  inquire  into  tlie  value 
of  this  apology,  which  is  never  adduced  in  behalf  of 
other  abuses,  and  which  availed  notliing  gainst  that 
tingly  power  imposed  by  the  mother  country^  but  over- 
thrown by  our  fathers,  it  is  sufficient  for  the  present 
purpose  to  linow  that  it  is  iiow  proposed  to  make  Slav- 
ery our  own  original  act.  Here  is  a  fresh  case  of  actual 
tran^ression,  which  we  cannot  cast  upon  the  shoulders 
of  any  progenitors,  nor  upon  any  mother  country,  dis- 
tant in  time  or  place.  The  Congress  of  the  United 
States,  the  people  of  the  United  States,  at  this  day,  in 
this  vaunted  period  of  light,  will  be  responsible  for  it, 
so  that  it  shaU  be  said  hereafter,  so  long  as  the  dismal 
history  of  Slavery  is  read,  that  in  the  year  of  Christ 
1854  a  new  and  deliberate  act  was  passed  by  which  a 
vast  territory  was  opened  to  its  incursions. 

Historic  instances  show  how  such  an  act  will  make 
ns  solitary  among  the  nations.  In  autocratic  Russia, 
the  serfdom  which  constitutes  the  "peculiar  institu- 
tion "  of  that  great  empire  is  never  allowed  to  travel 
with  the  imperial  flag,  aeeordir^  to  American  preten- 
sion, into  provinces  newly  acquired  by  the  common  blood 
and  treasure,  bat,  by  positive  prohibition,  in  harmony 
with  the  general  conscience,  is  carefully  restricted  with- 
in its  ancient  confines ;.  and  this  prohibition  —  the  WH- 
mot  Proviso  of  Eussia  —  is  rigorously  enforced  on  every 
side,  in  all  the  provinces,  as  in  Bessarabia  on  the  south, 
and  Poland  on  the  west,  so  that,  in  fact,  no  Eussian 
nobleman  is  able  to  move  into  these  important  territo- 
ries with  his  slaves,  Thus  Russia  speaks  for  Freedom, 
and  disowns  the  slaveholdii^  dogma  of  our  country. 
India,  the  land  of  caste,  and  Turkey,  the  abode  of  po- 
lygamy, both  fasten  upon  Slavery  the  stigma  of  repro- 


■cibyGooglc 


KO  EEPEAL  OF  THE  mSSOUEI   COMPROMISE.        293 

bation.  Tlie  Barbary  States  of  Africa,  occupying  the 
same  parallels  of  latitude  with  the  Slave  States  of  our 
Union,  and  resembling  them  in  the  nature  of  their  boun- 
daries, their  productions,  their  climate,  and  the  "  peculiar 
institution"  which  sought  shelter  in  both,  are  changed 
into  Abolitionists.  Algiers,  seated  on  the  line  of  36° 
30',  is  dedicated  to  Freedom.  Tunis  and  Morocco  are 
doing  likewiaa 

As  the  effort  now  making  is  extraordinary  in  char- 
acter, so  no  assumption  seems  too  extraordinary  to  be 
advanced  in  its  support.  The  primal  truth  of  the  E(juai- 
ity  of  Men,  proclaimed  in  our  Declaration  of  Indepen- 
dence, is  assailed,  and  tliis  Great  Charter  of  our  country 
discredited.  Sir,  you  and  I  will  soon  pass  away,  but 
that  charter  will  continue  to  stand  above  impeachment 
or  question.  The  Declaration  of  Independence  was  a 
Declaration  of  Eights,  and  the  language  employed, 
though  general  in  character,  must  obviously  be  con- 
fined within  the  design  and  sphere  of  a  Declaration 
of  Eights,  involving  no  such  pitiful  absurdity  as  was 
attributed  to  it  yesterday  by  the  Senator  from  Indiana 
[Mr.  Pettit].  Sir,  who  has  pretended  that  all  men 
are  bom  equal  in  physical  strength  or  in  mental  capaci- 
ties, in  beauty  of  form  or  health  of  body  ?  Certainly 
not  the  signers  of  the  Declaration  of  Independence, 
who  could  have  been  guilty  of  no  such  self -stultifica- 
tion. Diversity  is  the  law  of  creation,  tmrestrieted  to 
race  or  color.  But  as  God  is  no  respecter  of  persons, 
and  as  all  are  equal  in  his  sight,  both  Dives  and  Laza- 
rus, master  and  slave,  so  are  all  equal  in  natural  inborn 
rights;  and  pardon. me,  if  I  say  it  is  a  mere  qiiibble  to 
adduce,  in  argument  against  this  vital  axiom  of  Liberty, 
the  physical  or  mental  inequalities  by  which  men  are 


■cibyGoogIc 


294  THE  LANDMARK  OF  FREEDOM: 

characterized,  or  the  unhappy  degradation  to  which,  in 
violation  of  a  common  brotherhood,  they  are  doomed. 
To  deny  the  Declaration  of  Independence  is  to  rush 
-an  the  bossea  of  the  shield  of  the  Almighty,  —  -which, 
in  all  respects,  the  supporters  of  this  measure  seem 
to  do. 

To  the  delusive  su^estion  of  the  Senator  from  North 
Carolina  [Mr.  Badgbr],  that  by  overthrow  of  this  Pro- 
hibition the  number  of  slaves  will  not  be  increased, 
that  there  will  be  simply  a  beneficent  diffusion  of  Slav- 
ery, and  not  its  extension,  I  reply  at  once,  that  this 
ailment,  if  of  any  value,  if  not  mere  words  and 
nothing  else,  would  equally  Justify  and  require  the 
overthTOW  of  the  Prohibition  of  Slavery  in  the  Free 
States,  and,  indeed,  everywhere  throughout  the  world. 
All  the  dilies,  which,  in  different  countries,  from  time 
to  time,  with  the  march  of  civilization",  have  been  pain- 
fully set  up  against  the  inroads  of  this  evil,  must  be 
removed,  and  every  land  opened  anew  to  its  destructive 
flood.  It  is  clear,  beyond  dispute,  that  by  the  over- 
throw of  this  Prohibition  Slavery  will  be  quickened, 
and  slaves  themselves  will  be  multiplied,  while  new 
room  and  verge  will  be  secured  for  the  gloomy  opera- 
tions of  Slave  Law,  under  which  free  labor  will  itooop, 
and  a  vast  territory  be  smitten  with  sterility.  Sir,  a 
blade  of  gi'ass  would  not  grow  where  the  horse  of  AttUa 
had  trod ;  nor  can  any  true  prosperity  spring  up  in  the 
footprints  of  a  slave. 

But  it  is  ai^ed  that  slaves  -will  be  carried  into  Ne- 
braska only  in  small  numbers,  and  therefore  the  ques- 
tion is  of  little  practical  moment.  My  distinguished 
e  [Mr.  Everett],  in  his  eloquent  speech,  heavk- 
.  to  this  apology,  and  allowed  himself,  while  up- 


■cibyGooglc 


NO   KEPEAL  OF  THE  MISSOUEI  COMPEOMISE.       295 

holding  the  Prohibition,  to  disparage  its  importance  in 
a  manner  from  which  I  feel  obliged,  Mndly,  but  moat 
strenuously,  to  dissent.  Sir,  the  very  census  attests  its 
vital  consequence.  There  is  Missouri,  at  this  moment, 
with  Illinois  on  the  east  and  Nebraska  on  the  west,  all 
covering  nearly  the  same  spaces  of  latitude,  and  resem- 
bling each  other  in  soil,  climate,  and  natural  produc- 
tions. Mark  now  the  contrast !  By  the  potent  efficacy 
of  the  Ordinance  of  the  Northwestern  Territory  Illinois 
is  a  Free  State,  while  Missouri  has  eighty-seven  thou- 
sand four  hundred  and  twenty-two  slaves ;  "and  the 
simple  question  which  challenges  answer  is,  whether 
Nebraska  shall  be  preserved  in  the  condition  of  lUinois 
or  surrendered  to  that  of  Missouri  ?  Surely  this  cannot 
be  ti'eated  lightly.  But  I  am  unwilling  to  measure  the 
exigency  of  the  Prohibition  by  the  number  of  persons, 
whether  many  or  few,  whom  it  may  protect.  Human 
rights,  whether  in  a  multitude  or  the  solitary  individ- 
ual, are  entitled  to  equal  and  unhesitating  support. 
In  this  spirit,  the  flag  of  our  country  only  recently 
became  the  impenetrable  panoply  of  a  homeless  wan- 
derer who  claimed  its  protection  in  a  distant  sea ;  ^  and 
in  this  spirit  I  am  constrained  to  declare  that  there  is 
no  place  accessible  to  human  avarice  or  human  lust  or 
human  force,  whether  the  lowest  valley  or  the  loftiest 
mountain-top,  whether  the  broad  flower-spangled  prai- 
ries or  the  snowy  caps  of  the  Rocky  Mountains,  where 
the  Prohibition  of  Slavery,  Kke  the  commandments  of 
the  Decalogue,  should  not  go.y 


'  Martin  KoBzta,  Hungarinn  by 

birth,  wlio  had  mads  I 

decltiration  of  citizenship,  and  had 

>  United  States 

Consul  at  Smyrna,  was,  July  2.  IE 

ISS,  Biiri-endered  by  an 

Austrian  nian- 

of-wnr  in  tlie  Imrbor  of  Smyrna  ai 

t  the  demand  of  a  ma 

n-of-war  of  the 

United  States. 

;db,Googlc 


296  THE  LANDMARK  OF  FREEDOM: 

I. 

And  now.  Sir,  in  the  name  of  that  Public  Faith 
■which  is  the  very  ligament  of  civil  society,  and  which 
the  great  Boman  orator  tells  us  it  ia  detestable  to  break 
even  with  an  enemy,  I  arraign  this  scheme,  and  hold  it 
Tip  to  the  judgment  of  the  country.  There  is  an  early 
Italian  story  of  an  experienced  citizen,  who,  when  toM 
by  his  nephew,  at  the  University  of  Bologna,  that  he 
had  been  studying  the  science  of  Might,  said  in  reply, 
"You  have  spent  your  time  to  little  purpose.  It  would 
have  been  better,  had  you  learned  the  science  of  Might, 
for  that  is  worth  two  of  the  other" ;  and  the  bystanders 
of  that  day  all  agreed  that  the  veteran  spoke  the  trutL 
I  begin.  Sir,  by  assuming  that  honorable  Senators  will 
not  act  in  this  spirit,  —  that  they  wdl  not  wantonly  and 
flagitiously  discard  any  obhgation,  pledge,  or  covenant, 
because  they  chance  to  possess  the  power,  — ■  that  they 
will  not  substitute  Tivight  for  right. 

Sir,  the  proposition  before  you  involves  not  merely 
the  repeal  of  existing  law,  but  the  infraction  of  solemn 
obl^ations,  originally  proposed  and  assumed  by  the 
South,  after  protracted  and  embittered  contest,  as  a 
covenant  of  peace,  with  regard  to  certain  specified  ter- 
ritory therein  described,  namely,  "All  that  territory 
ceded  by  France  to  the  United  States,  under  the  name 
of  Louisiana,"  ™  according  to  which,  in  consideration 
of  the  admission  into  the  Union  of  Missouri  aa  a  Slave 
State,  Slavery  was  forever  prohibited  in  all  the  remain- 
ing part  of  this  territory  which  lies  north  of  36°  30'. 
This  arrangement  between  diiJ'erent  sections  of  the 
Union,  the  Slave  States  of  the  iirst  part  and  the  Free 
States  of  the  second  part,  though  usually  known  as 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   REPEAL  OF.  THE  MISSOUBI  COMPEOMISE.       297 

the  Missouri  Compromise,  was  at  the  time  styled  a 
COMPACT.  In  its  stipulations  for  Slavery,  it  was  justly- 
repugnant  to  tlie  conscience  of  the  Nocth,  and  ought 
never  to  have  been  made ;  but  on  that  side  it  has  been 
performed.  And  now  the  unperformed  outstanding  ob- 
ligations to  Preedom,  originally  proposed  and  assumed 
by  the  South,  aiB  resisted. 

Yeats  have  passed  since  these  obligations  were  em- 
bodied in  the  legislation  of  Congress,  and  accepted  by 
the  country.  Meanwhile  the  statesmen  by  whom  they 
were  framed  and  vindicated  have,  one  by  one,  dropped 
from  this  earthly  sphere.  Their  living  voices  cannot 
now  be  heard,  for  the  conservation  of  that  Public  Faith 
to  which  they  were  pledged.  But  this  extraordinary 
lapse  of  time,  with  the  complete  fruition  by  one  party  of 
all  the  benefits  belonging  to  it  under  the  compact,  gives 
to  the  transaction  an  added  and  most  saci'ed  strength. 
Prescription  steps  in  and  with  new  bonds  confirms  the 
original  work,  to  tlie  end,  that,  while  men  ai'e  mortal, 
controversies  shall  not  be  immortal.  Death,  vrith  in- 
exorable scythe,  has  mowed  down  the  authors  of  this 
compact;  but,  with  conservative  hour-glass,  the  dread 
destroyer  has  counted  out  a  succession  of  years,  which 
now  defile  before  us,  like  so  many  sentinels,  to  guard 
the  sacred  landmark  of  Freedom, 

A  simple  statement  of  facts,  derived  from  the  Jour- 
nals of  Congress  and  contemporary  records,*  will  show 
the  origin  and  nature  of  this  compact,  the  influence 

1  As  tha  TOlames  of  the  Annals  of  Congress  covering  the  proceedings  on 
the  Sliasouri  Comproniiae  ware  not  published  when  this  speech  was  made, 
Mr.  Sninner  wan  obligad  to  relv  npon  the  National  Intelli(!;enoer  and  Nlles's 
R"<;ister.    la  the  Di'eseiit  edition  reterences  are  mode  to  the  Annals  of  Con- 


;db,Googlc 


298  THE   LANDMARK    OF  FREEDOM: 

by  whieli  it  was  established,  and  the  obligations  it  im- 


As  early  as  1818,  at  the  first  session  of  the  Fifteenth 
Congress,  a  bill  was  reported  to  the  Hoc^e  of  itepre- 
sentatives,  authorizing  the  people  of  the  Missouri  Ter- 
ritory to  form  a  Constitution  and  State  Govei-nment, 
for  the  admission  of  such  State  into  the  Union ;  hut  at 
that  session  no  final  action  was  had.  At  the  next  ses- 
sion, in  February,  1819,  the  hiU  was  again  brought  for- 
wai-d,  when  an  eminent  Representative  of  New  York, 
whose  life  was  spared  till  this  last  autumn,  Mr.  James 
TalLnadge,  moved  a  clause  prohibiting  any  furtlier  intro- 
duction of  slaves  into  the  proposed  State,  and  securing 
Freedom  to  the  children  horn  withiu  the  State,  after  ad- 
mission into  the  Union,  on  attaining  the  age  of  twenty- 
five  years.  This  important  proposition,  which  assumed 
a  power  not  only  to  prohibit  the  ingress  of  Slavery 
into  the  State,  hit  also  to  abolish  it  there,  was  passed  in 
the  affirmative,  after  a  vehement  debate  of  three  days. 
On  a  division  of  the  question,  the  first  part,  prohibit- 
ing tlie  further  introduction  of  slaves,  was  adopted  by 
eighty-seven  yeas  to  seventy-six  nays ;  the  second  part, 
providing  for  the  emancipation  of  children,  was  adopted 
by  eighty-two  yeas  to  seventy-eight  nays.  Otlier  prop- 
ositions to  thwart  the  operation  of  these  amendments 
were  voted  down,  and  on  the  17th  of  February  the  bill 
was  i-ead  a  third  time,  and  passed  with  these  important 
i-estrictions. 

In  the  Senate,  after  debate,  the  provision  for  the' 
emancipation  of  children  was  struck  out  by  tliirty-one 
yeas  to  seven  nays ;  the  other  provision,  against  the 
furtlier  introduction  of  Slavery,  was  struck  out  by 
twenty-two  yeas  to  sixteen  nays.     Thus  emasculated. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO  EEPEAL  OF   THE   MISSOUKI   COxMPROMISE.        299 

the  bill  was  returned  to  the  House,  whieli,  on  the  2d  of 
March,  by  a  votie  of  seventy-eight  nays  to  seventy-six 
yeas,  refused  its  concurrence.  The  Senate  adhered  to 
theii'  amendments,  and  the  House,  by  seventy-eight  yeas 
to  sixty-six  nays,  adhered  to  their  disagreement ;  and  so 
at  this  session  the  Missouri  Bill  was  lost :  and  here  was 
a  temporary  triumph  for  Freedom. 

Meanwhile  the  same  controversy  was  renewed  on  the 
hill  pending  at  the  same  time  for  the  oi^aniiiation  of 
the  Territory  of  Arkansas,  then  known  as  the  southern 
part  of  the  Territory  of  Missouri,  The  restrictions 
already  adopted  in  the  Missouri  Bill  were  moved  by 
Mr.  Taylor,  of  New  Tork,  subsequently  Speaker;  but, 
after  at  least  five  close  votes,  on  the  yeas  and  nays,  in 
one  of  which  the  House  waa  equally  divided,  eighty- 
eight  yeas  to  eighty-eight  nays,  they  were  lost.  An- 
other propasition  by  Mx.  Taylor,  simpler  in  form,  that 
Slaveiy  should  not  hereafter  be  introduced  into  this 
Territoiy,  was  lost  by  ninety  nays  to  eighty-six  yeas ; 
and  the  Arkansas  Bill,  on  the  20th  of  February,  was 
read  the  third  time  and  passed.  In  the  Senate,  Mr. 
Burrill,  of  Rhode  Island,  moved,  as  an  amendment,  Uie 
prohibition  of  the  further  introduction  of  Slavery  into 
this  Territory,  which  was  lost  by  nineteen  nays  to  four- 
teen yeas.  And  thus,  without  any  provision  for  Free- 
dom, Arkansas  was  organized  as  a  Territory :  and  here 
was  a  triumph  of  Slavery. 

At  this  same  session  Alabama  was  admitted  as  a 
Slave  State,  without  any  restriction  or  objection. 

It  was  in  the  discussion  on  the  Arkansas  Bill,  at  this 
session,  that  we  find  the  earliest  suggestion  of  a  Com- 
promise. Defeated  in  his  efforts  to  prohibit  Slavery 
in  this  Territory,  Mr.  Taylor  stated  that  "  he  thoiight  it 


■cibyGoogIc 


300  THE  LANDMARK   OF  FREEDOM  : 

important  that  some  line  should  be  designated  beyond 
which  Slavery  should  not  be  permitted,"  and  he  moved 
its  prohibition  hereafter  in  all  Territories  of  the  United 
States  north  of  36°  30'  north  latitude,  without  any  excep- 
tion of  Missouri,  wJvkh  is  north  of  this  line.  Tliia  propo- 
sition, though  -withdrawn  after  debate,  was  at  once  wel- 
comed by  Mr.  Livermore,  of  New  Hamjehire,  as  "  made 
in  the  true  spirit  of  compromise."  It  was  opposed  by  Mr. 
Ehea,  of  Tennessee,  on  behalf  of  Slavery,  who  avowed 
himself  against  eveiy  lestriction,  —  and  also  by  Mr. 
Ogle,  of  Pennsylvania,  on  behalf  of  Freedom,  who  was 
"opposed  to  any  compromise  by  which  Slavery  in  any 
of  the  Territories  shoidd  be  i-ecognized  or  sanctioned  by 
Congress."  In  this  spirit  it  was  opposed  and  supported 
by  others,  among  whom  was  Geneial  Harrison,  after- 
wards President  of  the  United  States,  who  "  assented  to 
the  expediency  of  establishing  some  such  hne  of  dis- 
crimination," but  proposed  a  line  due  west  fram  the 
mouth  of  the  Des  Moines,  thus  constituting  tlie  north- 
ern, and  not  the  southern  boundary  of  Missouri,  the 
partition  line  between  Freedom  and  Slavery. 

This  idea  of  Compromise,  though  su^ested  by  Mr. 
Taylor,  was  thus  early  adopted  and  vindicated  in  tliis 
very  debate  by.  an  eminent  character — Mr.  Louis  Mc- 
Lane,  of  Delaware — who  has  since  held  high  office  in 
the  coimtry,^  and  enjoyed  no  common  measure  of  public 
confidence.  Of  aH  the  leading  actors  in  these  early 
scenes,  he  and  Mr.  Mercer  alone  are  yet  spared.  On 
this  occasion  he  said :  — 

"  The  fixing  of  a  line  on  the  west  of  the  Mississippi,  north 
of  which  Slavery  should  not  be  tolerated,  liad  always  heen  wUh 


■cibyGoogIc 


MO   KEPEAL  OP  THE  MISSOURI  COMPKOMISR       301 

liim  a  favorite  policy,  and  he  hoped  the  day  was  not  distant, 
when,  upon  principles  oi  fair  compromise,  it  might  consti- 
tutionally  be  effected.'" 

Tlie  pi'esent  attempt,  however,  he  regarded  as  prema- 
ture. After  opposing  the  restriction  on  Missouri^  he 
concluded  by  declaring  :  — 

"  At  the  BttKie  time,  I  do  not  mean  to  abandon  the  policy 
to  which  1  alluded  in  the  commencement  of  my  remarks.  I 
think  it  but  fair  that  both  sections  of  the  Union  should  be 
accommodated  on  this  subject,  with  regard  to  which  so  much 
feeling  has  been  manifested.  The  same  great  motives  of  policy 
which  reconciled  and  harmoniaed  the  jarring  and  discordant 
elements  of  our  system  originally,  and  which  enabled  the 
framers  of  our  happy  Constitution  to  compromise  the  differ- 
ent interests  which  then  prevailed  Tipon  this  and  other  sub- 
jects, if  properly  cherished  by  us,  will  enable  lis  to  achieve 
similar  objects.  If  we  meet  upon  principles  of  reciprocity, 
we  cannot  fail  to  do  justice  to  all.  /(  has  already  been 
avowed  hy  gentlemen  on  this  fioor,  from  the  South  and  the  West, 
that  they  will  agree  upon,  a  line  which  shall  divide  the  slave- 
hoMvng  from  the  nonrskvoeholding  States,  It  is  this  proposi- 
tion I  am  anxious  to  eject ;  but  I  vneh  to  ^ect  it  by  some 
COMPACT  which  shall  be  binding  upon  all  parties  and  all  sub- 
sequent Legislatures,  —  which  cannot  be  changed,  and  will  not 
fluctuate  with  the  diversity  of  feeling  and  of  sentiment  to 
which  this  empire,  in  its  march,  must  be  destined.  There 
is  a  vast  and  immense  tract  of  country  west  of  the  Missis- 
sippi yet  to  be  settled,  and  intimately  connected  with  the 
northern  section  of  the  Union,  -upon,  which  this  compromise 
can  be  effected."  ^ 

The  suggestions  of  Compromise  were  at  this  time 
vain :  each  party  was  determined.     The  North,  hy  the 

1  Annals  of  Congress,  IBth  Cong.  2d  Soas.,  Fab.  IT,  1818,  Vol.  II.  col.  1333. 


■cibyGoogIc 


302  THE  LANDMARK  OF  FREEDOM: 

prevailing  voice  of  its  Eepresentatives,  claimed  all  for 
Freedom ;  the  South,  by  its  potential  command  of  the 
Senate,  claimed  all  for  Slavery. 

The  report  of  this  debate  aixDused  the  country.  T"or 
the  first  time  in  our  history,  Freedom,  after  animated 
stru^le,  hand  to  hand,  was  kept  in  check  by  Slavery. 
The  original  policy  of  our  fathers  in  the  restriction  of 
Slavery  was  suspended,  and  this  giant  wrong  tlireatened 
to  stalk  into  aR  the  broad  national  domain.  Men  at  the 
North  were  humbled  and  amazed.  The  imperious  de- 
mands of  Slavery  seemed  incredible.  Meanwhile  the 
whole  subject  was  adjourned  from  Congress  to  the  peo- 
ple. Through  the  press  and  at  public  meetings,  an 
earnest  voice  was  raised  against  the  admission  of  Mis- 
souri into  the  "Union  without  the  restriction  of  Slavery. 
Jut^es  left  the  bench,  and  clei^ymen  the  pulpit,  to  swell 
the  indignant  protest  which  went  up  from  good  men 
without  distinction  of  party  or  pursuit. 

The  movement  was  not  confined  to  a  few  persons,  nor 
to  a  few  States.  A  public  meeting  at  Trenton,  in  New 
Jersey,  was  followed  by  others  in  New  York  and  Phila- 
delpliia,  and  finally  at  Worcester,  Salem,  and  Boston, 
where  committees  were  organized  to  rally  the  country. 
The  citizens  of  Baltimore,  in  public  meeting  at  the  court- 
house, with  the  mayor  in  the  chair,  resolved  "  that  the 
future  admission  of  slaves  into  the  States  which  may 
hereafter  be  formed  west  of  the  Mississippi  ought  to 
be  prohibited  by  Congress."  Villages,  towns,  and  cities, 
by  memorial,  petition,  and  prayer,  called  upon  Congress 
to  maintain  the  great  principle  of  the  Prohibition  of 
Slavery.  The  same  principle  was  also  commended  by 
the  resolutions  of  State  Legislatures ;  and  Pennsylvania, 
inspired  by  the  teachings  of  Franklin  and  the  convictions 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO    REPEAL    OF    THE  MISSOURI   COMPROMISE.        303 

of  the  respectable  denomination  of  Friends,  unanimously- 
asserted  at  once  the  right  and  the  duty  of  Congress  to 
prohibit  Slavery  west  of  the  Mississippi,  solemnly  call- 
ing upon  her  sister  States  "  to  refuse  to  covenant  with 
crime."  New  Jersey  and  Delaware  followed.  Ohio  as- 
serted the  same  principle :  so  did  Indiana.  The  latter 
State,  not  content  with  providing  for  the  future,  severely 
censured  one  of  its  Senators  for  his  vote  to  organize 
Arkansas  without  the  prohibition  of  Slavery.  The  reso- 
lutions of  New  York  were  reinforced  by  the  recommen- 
dation of  De  Witt  Clinton.* 

Amidst  these  excitements  Congress  eame  together 
in  December,  1819,  taking  possession  of  these  Halls 
of  the  Capitol  for  the  first  time  since  their  desolation 
by  the  British.  On  the  day  after  the  receipt  of  tlie 
President's  Message  two  several  Committees  of  the 
House  were  constituted,  one  to  consider  the  application 
of  Maine,  and  the  other  of  Missouri,  to  enter  the  Union 
as  separate  and  independent  States.  With  only  the 
delay  of  a  single  day,  the  bill  for  the  admission  of  Mis- 
sonri  was  reported  to  the  House  without  the  lestrietion 
of  Slavery ;  but,  as  if  shrinking  from  the  immediate  dis- 
cussion of  the  great  question  it  involved,  afterwards,  on 
motion  of  Mr.  Taylor,  of  New  York,  modified  by  Mr. 
Mercer,  of  Virginia,  its  consideration  was  postponed  for 
several  weeks :  all  which,  be  it  observed,  is  in  open 
contrast  with  the  manner  in  which  the  present  discus- 
sion has  been  precipitated  upon  Congress.  Meanwhile 
the  Maine  Bill,  when  reported  to  the  House,  was  promptly 
acted  upon,  and  sent  to  the  Senate. 

In  the  interval  between  the  report  of  the  Missouri 
Bill  and  its  consideration  by  the  House,  a  Committee 

1  See  Niles'8  Weakly  Register,  Vol,  XWI.pemm. 


■cibyGoogIc 


to  mqu] 
troducti 


304  THE  LANDMARK  OF  FKEEDOM  : 

was  constituted,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Taylor,  of  N"ew  York, 
re  into  the  expediency  of  prohibiting  the  in- 
Lon  of  Slaveiy  into  the  Territories  west  of  the 
Lppi.  This  Committee,  at  the  end  of  a  fortnight, 
was  discharged  from  further  consideration  of  the  subject, 
which,  it  was  understood,  would  enter  into  the  postponed 
debate  on  the  Missouri  BiU. 

Tliis  early  effort  to  interdict  Slavery  in  the  Territories 
by  special  law  is  worthy  of  notice  on  account  of  ex- 
pressions of  opinion  it  drew  forth.  In  the  course  of  his 
remarks,  Mr.  Taylor  declared  that  "  he  presumed  there 
was  no  member  —  he  knew  of  none  —  who  doubted  the 
constitutional  power  of  Congress  to  impose  such  a  re- 
striction on  the  Territories."^ 

A  generous  voice  from  Virginia  recognized  at  once 
the  right  and  duty  of  Congress.  This  was  from  Charles 
Fenton  Mercer,  who  declared,  that,  "  when  the  question 
proposed  should  come  fairly  before  the  House,  he  should 

support  the  proposition He  should  record  his  vote 

against  suffering  the  dark  cloud  of  calamity  which  now 
darkened  his  country  from  rolling  on  beyond  the  peace- 
ful shores  of  the  Mississippi."  ^ 

At  length,  on  the  25th  of  January,  1820,  the  House 
resolved  itself  into  Committee  of  the  Whole  on  the 
Missouri  BiU,  and  proceeded  with  its  discussion,  day 
by  day,  till  tlie  28th  of  Fehruaiy,  when  it  was  report- 
ed back  with  an  amendment  excluding  Slavery  from 
the  proposed  State.  At  the  opening  of  the  debate  an 
amendment  was  offered  with  a  view  to  Compromise, 
when  Mr.  Smith,  of  Maryland,  for  many  years  an  emi- 
nent Senator  of  that  State,  but  at  this  time  a  Repre- 
sentative, while  opposing  the  restriction  of  Missouri, 
I  Amiala  of  Congress,  16th  Cong,  Ist  Sess.,  1,  603.  s  ibid.,  603. 


■cibyGoogIc 


no   REPEAL   OF  THE  MISSOURI  COMPROMISE.       305 

■V  iiidiuited  the  prohibition  of  Slavery  in  tlie  Territo- 
iiea 

He  said  thit  he  rose  principally  with  a  view  to  state  his 
iinderstandmg  of  the  proposed  amendment,  namely  :  That  it 
retained  tlie  boundaries  of  Missouri  as  delineated  in  the  bill ; 
thit  it  ptohibited  the  admission  of  slaves  west  of  the  west 
line  of  Missouti  and  north  of  the  north  hne ;  that  it  did  not 
mtertei-e  with  the  Territory  of  Arkansas,  or  the  uninhabited 
land  west  thereof.  He  tkmight  the  propomtion  not  exception- 
able, bat  doubted  the  propriety  of  its  forming  a  part  of  the 
bill  He  considered  the  power  of  Congress  over  the  Terri- 
tory aa  supreme,  unlimited,  before  its  admission ;  that  Con- 
gress could  impose  on  its  Territories  any  restriction  it  thought 
proper;  and  the  people,  when  they  settled  therein,  did  so 
under  a  full  knowledge  of  the  restriction.  If  citizens  go  into 
the  Territory  thus  restricted,  they  cannot  carry  with  them 
slaves.  They  wiU  be  without  slaves,  and  will  be  educated 
with  prejudices  and  habits  such  as  will  exclude  all  desire 
on  their  part  to  admit  Slavery,  when  they  shall  become  suf- 
ficiently numerous  to  be  admitted  aa  a  State.  And  this  is 
the  advantage  proposed  by  the  amendment."  ^ 

Meanwhile  the  same  question  was  presented  to  the 
Senate,  where  a  conclusion  was  reached  earlier  than  in 
the  House.  A  clause  for  the  admission  of  Missouri  was 
moved  by  way  of  tack  to  the  Maine  BilL  To  this  an 
amendment  was  moved  by  Mr.  Eoberts,  of  Pennsylvania, 
prohibiting  the  further  introduction  of  Slavery  into  the 
State,  which,  after  a  fortnight's  debate,  was  defeated  by 
twenty-seven  naya  to  sixteen  yeas. 

The  debate  in  the  Senate  was  of  unusual  interest  and 
splendor.  It  was  especially  illustrated  by  an  effort  of 
eminent  power  from  that  great  lawyer  and  orator,  Wil- 

1  Annula  of  Congress,  irf  eupi-a,  I.  B40,  041,  January  26, 1820. 


■cibyGoogIc 


306  THE  LANDMAEK.OF  FEEEDOM  : 

liam  Pinkney.  Recently  retiimed  from  a  snccession  of 
missions  to  foreign  courts,  and  at  this  time  the  acknowl- 
edged chief  of  the  American  bar,  particularly  skilled  in 
questions  of  Constitutional  Law,  his  course  as  a  Senator 
from  Maryland  was  calculated  to  produce  a  profound  im- 
pression. A  speech  from  him,  which  for  two  days  ^  drew 
to  this  Chamber  an  admiring  throng,  and  at  the  time 
was  fondly  compared  with  the  best  examples  of  Greece 
and  Eome,  is  without  any  record ;  hut  another,  made 
shortly  afterwards,  remains  to  us,  and  here  we  find  the 
first  authoritative  proposition  and  statement  of  what 
has  been  since  known  as  the  Missouri  Compromise. 
This  latter  effort  was  mainly  directed  against  the  re- 
striction upon  Missouri,  but  it  began  and  ended  with  the 
idea  of  Compromise.  "  Kotwithstanding,"  he  says,  "  oc- 
casional appearances  of  rather  an  unfavorable  descrip- 
tion, I  have  long  since  persuaded  myself  that  the  Mis- 
souri question,  as  it  is  called,  m^ht  be  laid  to  rest  with 
innocence  and  safety  by  some  conciliatory  compromiBe 
at  least,  by  which,  as  is  our  duty,  we  might  reconcile 
the  extremes  of  conflicting  views  and  feelings,  without 
any  sacrifice  of  constitutional  principle."  And  he  closed 
with  the  hope  that  the  restriction  on  Missouri  would 
not  be  pressed,  but  that  the  whole  i^uestion  "  might  be 
disposed  of  in  a  manner  satisfactory  to  all,  h/  a  pro- 
jective jyrohihitiou  of  Slavery  in  the  territory  to  the  north 
and  west  of  Misstnm."  ^  Here  let  me  remark,  that,  in  the 
nomenclature  of  the  time,  the  term  "restriction"  was 
applied  to  the  requirement  of  Freedom  proposed  for  the 
State  of  Missouri,  while  the  term  "  prohibition  "  was  ap- 
plied to  the  outlying  territory  north  of  a  certain  line. 

1  January  21  and  24,  1820;  Annals  of  Cnnereas,  ut  supra,  I.  282,  236. 
S  Ibid.,  1.  38B-41T,  FebniBiy  15, 1E20.    Wheaton's  Life  of  Pinknoy,  Ap- 
pendix, pp.  573-012. 


;db,Googlc 


NO   REPEAL  OF  THE  MISSOURI  COMPROMISE.        307 

Tlie  compromise  proposed  was  abandonment  of  the  "re- 
striction," with  recognition  of  the  "prohibition," 

Tliia  authoritative  proposition  of  Compromise  from 
the  most  powerful  advocate  of  the  unconditional  admis- 
sion of  Missouri,  was  made  in  the  Senate  on  the  15th  of 
February.  From  various  indications,  it  seems  to  have 
found  prompt  favor  in  that  hody.  On  the  16th  of  Feb- 
ruary, the  union  of  Maine  and  Missouri  in  one  bill  pre- 
vailed there  by  twenty-three  yeas  to  twenty-one  nays. 
The  next  day,  Mr.  Thomas,  of  lUinoia,  who  had  always 
voted  with  the  South  against  any  restriction  upon  Mis- 
souri, introduced  the  famous  clause  prohibiting  Slavery 
in  territory  north  of  36°  30'  outside  this  State,  which 
constitutes  the  eighth  section  of  the  Missouri  Act.  An 
effort  was  made  to  include  within  the  prohibition  "  the 
whole  country  west  of  the  Mississippi,  except  Louisiana, 
Arkansas,  and  Missouri";  but  the  South  united  against 
such  extension  of  the  area  of  Freedom,  and  it  was  de- 
feated by  twenty-four  nays  to  twenty  yeas.  The  pro- 
hibition, as  moved  by  Mr.  Thomas,  then  prevailed  by 
thirty-four  yeas  to  only  ten  nays.  Among  those  in  the 
affirmative  were  both  the  Senators  from  each  of  the 
Slave  States,  Louisiana,  Tennessee,  Kentucky,  Delaware, 
Maryland,  and  Alabama,  and  also  one  of  the  Senators 
irom  each  of  the  Slave  States,  Mississippi  and  North 
Carolina,  including  in  the  honorable  list  the  familiar 
names  of  William  Pinkney,  James  Brown,  and  William 
Eufus  King. 

This  bill,  thus  amended,  is  the  first  legislative  em- 
bodiment of  the  Missouri  Compact  or  Compromise,  the 
essential  conditions  of  which  were  the  admission  of 
Missouri  as  a  State  without  any  restriction  of  Slavery, 
and  the  prohibition  of  Slavery  in  all  the  remaining  ter- 


■cibyGooglc 


dUi)  THE  LANDMARK   OF  FREEDOM: 

litory  of  Louisiana  north  of  36'  SO'}  Jaims-faced,  witli 
one  front  towards  Freedom  and  another  towards  Slavery, 
this  must  not  be  confounded  with  the  simpler  proposi- 
tion of  Mr.  Taylor,  at  the  preceding  session,  to  prohibit 
Slavery  in  ali  the  territory  north  of  36"  30',  including 
Missouri.  The  compromise  now  brought  forward,  follow- 
ing the  early  lead  of  Mr.  McLane,  both  i-ecognized  and 
prohibited  Slavery  north  of  36°  30'.  Here,  for  tlie  first 
time,  these  two  opposite  principles  commingled  in  one 
itive  channel ;  and  it  is  immediately  subsequent  to 
9  junction  that  we  discern  the  pi'Seise  responsibility 
1  by  different  parties.  And  now  observe  the  in- 
dubitable and  decisive  fact.  TIris  bill,  thus,  composed, 
containing  these  two  elements,  this  double  measure, 
finally  passed  the  Senate  by  a  test  vote  of  twenty-four 
yeas  to  twenty  nays.  The  yeas  embraced  every  South- 
ern Senator  except  Nathaniel  Macon,  of  North  Carolina, 
and  William  Smith,  of  South  Carolina. 

Mb.  Butler,  of  South  Cai-olina  (interrupting).  Mr.  Gail- 
lard,  of  South  Carolina,  voted  with  Mr.  Smith. 

Mr.  Sumner.  No,  Sir :  the  Journal,  ■which  I  now  hold 
in  my  hand,  shows  that  he  voted  for  the  bill  with  the 
Compromise.  I  repeat,  that  the  yeas  on  this  vital  ques- 
tion embraced  every  Southern  Senator  except  Mr.  Macon 
and  Mr.  Smith.  The  nays  embraced  eveiy  Northern 
Senator,  except  the  two  Senators  from  Illinois,  one  Sen- 
ator from  Rhode  Island,  and  one  from  New  Hampshire. 
And  this.  Sir,  is  the  record  of  the  first  stage  in  the 

1  The  eminent  JudsB  Story,  who  was  then  in  Washington,  mentiona 
these  conditions  in  n  pcivnte  letter,  under  date  of  February  27,  isao,  an  fol- 
Jowsi  "  There  is  a  great  (teal  of  hent  and  irritation,  but  most  probably  a 
oompromiae  will  take  place,  silmitting  Missonri  into  the  Union  without  the 
restriction,  and  imposing  it  on  all  tlie  other  Terriloriea."  —  Letter  ta  Stephen 
WhiU,  E$q. :  Life  and  Letters  of  Stoty,  Vol.  L  pp.  862,  863. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   REPEAL   OF  THE  MISSOURI  COMPROMISE.       309 

adoption  of  the  Missouri  Compromiae.  Pirst  openly 
armounced  and  vindicated  on  the  iloor  of  the  Senate  by 
a  distinguished  Southern  statesman,  it  was  forced  on 
the  North  by  an  almost  unanimous  Southern  vote. 

While  things  had  thus  culminated  in  the  Senate,  dis- 
cussion -was  still  proceeding  in  the  House  on  the  original 
Missouri  BOL  This  was  for  a  moment  arrested  by  the 
reception  from  the  Senate  of  the  Maine  Bill,  amended 
by  tacking  to  it  a  biU  for  the  admission  of  Missoui-i, 
embodying  the  Compromise.  Upon  this  the  debate  was 
brief  and  the  decision  prompt.  The  House  was  not  dis- 
posed to  abandon  the  substantial  restriction  of  Slavery 
in  Missouri  for  what  seemed  its  unsubstantial  prohibition 
in  an  unsettled  territoiy.  The  Senate's  amendments  to 
the  Maine  BiU  were  all  rejected,  and  the  bill  left  in  its 
original  condition.  This  was  done  by  large  votes.  Even 
the  Prohibition  of  Slavery  was  thrown  out,  by  one  hun- 
dred and  fifty-nine  yeas  to  eighteen  nays,  both  North 
and  South  uniting  against  it,  —  though,  in  this  small,  but 
persistent  minority,  we  find  two  Southern  statesmen, 
Samuel  Smith  and  Charles  Fenton  Mercer.  The  Sen- 
ate, on  receiving  the  bill  back  from  the  House,  insist- 
ed on  their  amendments.  The  House  in  turn  insisted  on 
their  disi^eement.  According  to  parliamentary  usage, 
a  Committee  of  Conference  between  the  two  Houses 
was  now  appointed.  Mr.  Thomas,  of  Illinois,  Mr.  Pink- 
ney,  of  Maryland,  and  Mr.  James  Barbour,  of  Vii^inia, 
composed  this  important  Connnittee  on  the  part  of  the 
Senate ;  and  Mr.  Holmes,  of  Massachusetts,  from  the  Dis- 
trict of  Maine,  Mr.  Taylor,  of  New  York,  Mr.  Lowndes, 
of  South  Carohua,  Mr.  Parker,  of  Massachusetts,  and  Mr. 
Kinsey,  of  New  Jersey,  on  the  part  of  the  House. 


■cibyGoogIc 


310  THE  LANDMARK  OF  FKEEDOM  : 

Meanwliile  the  House  voted  on  the  original  Missouri 
Bill.  An  amendment  peremptorily  interdicting  all  Sla- 
veiy  in  the  new  State  was  adopted  hy  ninety-four  yeas 
to  eiglity-six  nays ;  and  thus  the  hiil  passed  the  House 
and  was  sent  to  the  Senate  on  the  1st  of  March.  So, 
after  an  exasperated  and  protracted  discussion,  the  two 
Houses  were  at  a  dead-lock.  The  double-headed  Missou- 
ri Compromise  was  the  ultimatum  of  the  Senate,  The 
restriction  of  Slavery  in  Missouri,  involvii^,  of  course, 
its  prohibition  in  all  the  unorganized  temtories,  was 
the  ultimatum  of  the  House. 

At  this  stage,  on  the  2d  of  March,  the  Committee  of 
Conference  made  their  report,  which  was  ui^ed  at  once 
xipon  the  House  by  Mr.  Lowndes,  the  distinguished  rep- 
resentative from  South  Carolina,  and  one  of  her  most 
cherished  sons.  And  here.  Sir,  at  the  mention  of  this 
name,  still  so  fragrant  among  us,  let  me  for  one  moment 
stop  this  current  of  history,  to  express  the  honest  admi- 
ration with  which  he  inspires  me.  Mr.  Lowndes  died 
before  my  memory  of  political  events,  but  he  is  still 
endeared  by  the  self-abnegation  of  a  sii^le  utterance,  — 
that  the  Presidency  is  an  off,e6  not  to  he  sought  or  declined, 
—  a  sentunent  which  by  its  beauty,  in  one  part  at  least, 
shames  the  vdeness  of  aspiration  in  our  day.  Such  a 
man,  on  any  occasion,  would  be  a  host ;  but  he  now 
threw  his  great  soul  into  the  work.  He  even  objected 
to  a  motion  to  print  the  Eeport,  on  the  ground  "tliat 
it  would  imply  a  determination  in  the  House  to  delay  a 
decision  of  the  subject  to-day,  which  he  had  hoped  the 
House  was  fully  prepared  for."  The  question  then  fol- 
lowed on  striking  out  the  restriction  in  the  Missouri  BiU. 
The  report  m  the  "  National  Intelligencer"  ^  says  ;^ 

1  See  slso  Annuls  of  Congress,  at  mgn-a,  U.  1678, 1566,  Maroli  2, 1820, 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO  REPEAL  OF  THE  MISSOURI   COMPROMISE.        311 

"Mr.  Lowndes  spoke  briefly  in  suppoitof  the  Compiomise 
recommendod  by  the  Committee  of  Conference,  and  mged 
with  great  earnestness  the  propriety  of  a,  deciiiion  which 
would  restore  tranquillity  to  the  country,  which  was  de- 
manded by  every  consideration  of  discietion,  of  modeiation, 
of  wisdom,  and  of  virtue." 

"  Mr.  Mercer  [of  Virginia]  followed  on  the  same  side  with 
great  earnestness,  and  had  spoken  about  half  an  hour,  when 
he  was  compelled  by  indisposition  to  resume  his  seat." 

Such  eiTorts,  pressed  with  Southern  ardor,  were  not 
unavailii^.  In  conformity  with  tlie  report  of  the  Com- 
mittee, tlie  whole  question  was  forthwith  put  at  rest. 
Maine  and  Missouri  were  admitted  into  the  Union 
as  independent  States.  The  restriction  of  Slavery  in 
Missouri  was  ahandoned  by  a  vote  in  the  House  of 
ninety  yeas  to  eighty-seven  nays ;  and  the  prohibition 
of  Slavery  in  territories  north  of  36°  30',  exclusive  of 
Missouri,  was  enbstitnted  by  a  vote  of  one  hundred  and 
thirty-four  yeas  to  forty-two  nays.  Among  the  distin- 
guished Southern  names  in  the  affirmative  are  Louis 
McLane,  of  Delaware,  Samuel  Smith,  of  Maryland, 
Wdliam  Lovrades,  of  South  Carohna,  and  Charles  Fen- 
ton  Mercer,  of  Virginia.  The  title  of  the  Missouri  Bill 
was  amended  in  conformity  with  this  prohibition,  by 
adding  the  words,  "  and  to  prohibit  Slavery  in  certain 
Territories."  The  bills  then  passed  hoik  Jfouses  mthout 
a  division;  and  on  the  morning  of  the  3d  of  March, 
1820,  the  "National  Intelligencer"  contained  an  exult- 
ing article,  entitled  "  The  Question  Settled." 

Another  paper,  published  in  Baltimore,  immediately 
after  the  passage  of  the  Compromise,  vindicated  it  as  a 
perpetual  compact,  which  could  not  be  disturbed.  The 
language  is  so  clear  and  strong  that  I  will  read  it,  al- 


■cibyGooglc 


312  THE   LANDMAEK    OF   FREEDOM: 

though  it  has  been  already  quoted  by  my  able  and  ex- 
eeUenfc  Mend  from  Ohio  [1V&,  Chase]. 

"  It  is  true,  ilie  Compromm  is  support^  <mly  by  the  letter  of 
a  law  repealable  by  tJte  autlwrUy  which  enacts  it;  but  ilie  cir- 
cwmataiwea  of  tlie  case  give  to  this  law  a  koeal  force  equal  to 
that  of  a  positive  provision  of  ilie  Constitution ;  and  we  do  not 
hazard  anything  by  saying  tJtat  the  ConetitiUion  exists  in  its 
observance.  Both  parties  have  sacrificed  much  to  conciliation. 
We  vdsh  to  see  Uie  compact  kept  in  good  faith,  and  trust  thai 
a  kind  Providence  will  open  the  way  to  relieve  us  of  an  evil 
which  every  good  citizen  deprecates  as  the  supreme  curse  of 
this  country,"  ^ 

Sir,  the  distinguished  leaders  in  this  settlement  were 
all  from  the  South.  As  early  as  February,  1819,  Louis 
McLane,  of  Delaware,  urged  it  upon  Congress,  in  the  form 
of  a  "compact  binding  upon  all  subsequent  Legisla- 
tures." It  was  in  1820  brought  forward  and  upheld  in 
the  Senate  by  William  Pinlmey,  of  Maryland,  and  passed 
in  that  body  by  the  vote  of  every  Southern  Senator  ex- 
cept two,  against  the  vote  of  every  Northern  Senator 
except  four.  In  the  House  it  was  welcomed  at  onee  by 
Samuel  Smith,  of  Maryland,  and  Charles  Fenton  Mercer, 
of  Vii^inia.  The  Committee  of  Conference,  through 
which  it  finally  prevailed,  was  filled,  on  the  part  of  the 
Senate,  with  inflexible  partisans  of  the  Soutli,  such  as 
might  fitly  represent  the  sentiments  of  its  President, 
John  GaUlard,  a  Senator  from  South  CaroHna ;  on  the 
part  of  the  House,  it  was  nominated  by  Henry  Clay,  the 
Speaker,  a  Eepresentative  from  Kentucliy.  This  Com- 
mittee, thus  constituted,  dmwing  its  double  life  from  the 
South,  was  unanimous  in  favor  of  the  Compromise,  with 
but  one  dissenting  voice,  and  that  from  the  North,  — 
1  Nilcs's  Weelil}-  Register,  Mlm^h  11, 1830. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO    TiEPEAL    OF    THE    MISSOURI   COMPROMISR.         313 

Jolin  W.  Taylor,  of  Kew  York.  A  private  letter  from  Mr. 
Pinkney,  written  at  the  time,  and  preserved  by  his  dis- 
tinguished biographer,  shows  that  the  re].K)rt  made  by 
the  Committee  came  from  him. 

"  The  bill  for  the  admission  of  Missouri  into  the  Union 
{wtilnmt  restriction  as  to  Slavery)  may  be  considered  as  passed. 
That  bill  was  sent  back  again  this  morning  from  the  House, 
with  the  restriction  as  to  Slavery/.  The  Senate  voted  to  amend 
it  by  striking  out  the  restriction  (twenty-seven  to  fifteen), 
and  proposed,  ae  another  amendment,  what  I  have  all  aUm.g 
hem  the  advocate  of,  a  restriction  upon,  the  vacant  territory 
to  the  vort^  and  west,  as  to  Slaveri/.  To-night  the  House  of 
fiepresentativea  have  agreed  to  both,  of  these  amendments, 
in  opposition  to  their  former  votes,  and  this  affair  is  settled. 
To-morrow  we  shall  (of  course)  recede  from  our  amendments 
.  ^  to  Maine  (our  object  being  effected),  and  both  States  will 
be  admitted.  27iis  happy  result  has  been  aacomplislied  by  the 
Conference,  of  which  I  was  a  member  on  the  part  of  the  Senate, 
afid  of  which  I  proposed  the  report  which  has  been  made." ' 

Thus  again  the  Comprorriise  takes  its  life  from  the 
South.  Proposed  in  the  Committee  by  Mr.  Pinkney,  it 
was  urged  on  the  House  of  Eepreaentatives,  with  great 
earnestness,  by  Mr.  Lowndes,  of  South  Carolina,  and  Mr. 
Mercer,  of  Virginia :  and  here  again  is  the  most  persua- 
sive voice  of  the  South.  When  passed  by  Congress,  it 
next  came  before  the  President,  James  Monroe,  of  Vir- 
ginia, for  his  approval,  who  did  not  sign  it  till  after  the 
unanimous  opinion,  in  writing,  of  his  Cabinet,  composed 
of  John  Quincy  Adams,  William  H.  Crawford,  John  C. 
Calhoun,  Smith  Thompson,  and  William  Wirt,  —  a  ma- 
jority of  whom  were  Southern  men,  — that  the  prohi- 
bition of  Slavery  in  the  Territories  was  constitutional. 

1  Wheaton's  Life  of  Pinkney,  p.  187. 


■cibyGoogIc 


314  THE   LANDMARK   OF   FREEDOM; 

Thus  yet  again  the  Compromise  takes  its  life  from  the 
South. 

As  the  Compromise  took  its  life  from  the  South,  so, 
in  the  judgment  of  its  own  statesmen  at  the  time,  and 
according  to  unquestionable  facts,  the  South  was  the  con- 
quering party.  It  gained  forthwith  ita  darlir^  desire, 
the  first  and  essential  stage  in  the  admission  of  Missouri 
as  a  Slave  State,  successfully  consummated  at  the  next 
session,  —  and  subsequently  the  admission  of  Arliansas, 
also  as  a  Slave  State.  From  the  crushed  and  humbled 
North  it  received  more  than  the  full  consideration  stip- 
ulated in  its  favor.  On  the  aide  of  the  North  the  eon- 
tract  has  lieen  more  than  executed.  And  now  the  Soutli 
refuses  to  perform  the  part  which  it  originally  proposed 
and  assumed  in  this  transaction.  With  the  considera- 
tion in  its  pocket,  it  repudiates  the  bargain  which  it 
forced  upon  the  country.  This,  Sir,  is  a  simple  state- 
ment of  the  present  question. 

A  subtile  German  has  declared  that  he  could  find  her- 
esies in  the  Lord's  Prayer ;  and  I  believe  it  is  only  in  this 
spirit  that  any  flaw  can  be  found  in  the  existing  obliga^ 
tions  of  this  compact.  As  late  as  1848,  in  the  discussions 
of  this  body,  the  Senator  from  "Virginia  [Mr.  Masos], 
who  usually  sits  behind  me,  but  who  is  not  now  in  his 
seat,  wiiile  condemning  it  in  many  aspects,  says :  — 

"  Yet,  as  it  was  agreed  to,  as  a  Compromise,  by  the  South, 
for  the  sake  of  the  Union,  I  would  he  the  last  to  disturb  it."^ 

Even  th  s  letern  ed  Senator  recognized  it  as  an  obli- 
gation vl  cl  1  e  -n  uld  not  disturb.  And,  though  dis- 
believing t!  e  or  g  il  constitutionality  of  the  arrange- 
ment, he  WIS  clea  ly  ight,  I  know,  Sir,  that  it  is  in 
1  Congress  onnl  0  obe  30  h  Cong.  Ist  Seas.,  Vol.  XIX.,  Appendix,  p.  seT. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO    IlEPEAL   OF   THE    MJSSOUEI    COilPKOMISE.         315 

form  simply  a  Legislative  Act ;  but  as  the  Act  of  Settle- 
ment in  England,  declaring  the  rights  and  liberties  of 
the  subject  and  settling  the  succession  of  the  Crown, 
has  become  a  permanent  part  of  the  British  Constitu- 
tion, irrepealable  by  any  common  legislation,  so  this  Act, 
under  all  the  circumstances  attending  its  \ 
by  long  acquiescence,  and  the  complete  perfor 
its  conditions  by  one  party,  has  become  part  of  our  fun- 
damental law,  irrepealable  by  any  common  legislation. 
As  well  might  Congress  at  this  moment  undertake  to 
overhaul  the  original  purchase  of  Louisiana  as  unconsti- 
tutional, and  now,  on  this  account,  thrust  away  that  mag- 
nificent heritage,  with  all  its  cities.  States,  and  Territories, 
teeming  with  civilization.  Tlie  Missouri  Compact,  in  its 
unperformed  obligations  to  Freedom,  stands  at  this  day 
as  impregnable  as  the  Louisiana  purchase. 

I  appeal  to  Senators  about  me  not  to  disturb  it.  I 
appeal  to  the  Senators  from  Viiginia  to  keep  inviolate 
the  compact  made  in  their  behalf  by  James  Barbour 
and  Charles  Fenton  Mercer.  I  appeal  to  the  Senators 
from  South  Carolina  to  guard  the  work  of  John  Gail- 
lai'd  and  William  Lowndes.  I  appeal  to  the  Senatoi-s 
from  Maryland  to  xiphoid  the  Compromise  which  elicit- 
ed the  constant  support  of  Samuel  Smith,  and  was  first 
triumphantly  pressed  by  the  unsurpassed  eloq^uenoe  of 
Pmkney.  I  appeal  to  the  Senators  from  Delaware  to 
maintain  the  landmark  of  Freedom  in  the  Territory  of 
Louisiana  early  proposed  by  Louis  McLane.  I  appeal 
to  the  Senators  from  Kentucky  not  to  repudiate  the 
pledges  of  Henry  Clay.  I  appeal  tc  the  Senators  from 
Alabama  not  to  break  the  agreement  sanctioned  by  the 
earliest  votes  in  the  Senate  of  their  late  most  honored 
fellow-citizen,  WiUiam  Eufus  King.    Sir,  I  have  heard 


■cibyGoogIc 


3](i  THE   LANDMARK   OF   FREEDOM: 

of  lionor  tliat  felt  a  stain  like  a  wound.  If  tliere  be  any 
such  in  this  Chamber, — and  surely  there  is, — it  ■will  hes- 
itate to  take  upon  itself  the  stahi  of  this  transaction. 

Sir,  Congress  may  now  set  aside  this  obligation,  re- 
pudiate tills  plighted  faith,  annul  this  compact ;  and 
some  of  you,  forgetful  of  the  majesty  of  honest  dealing, 
in  order  to  support  Slavery,  may  consider  it  advanta- 
geous to  use  this  power.  To  all  such  let  me  commend 
a  familiar  story.  An  eminent  leader  in  Antiquity,  The- 
mistocles,  once  amiounced  to  the  Athenian.  Assembly, 
that  he  had  a  scheme  in  contemplation,  h^hly  bene- 
ficial to  the  State,  but  which  could  not  be  made  public, 
lie  was  thereupon  directed  to  communicate  it  to  Aris- 
tides,  sumamed  the  Just,  and,  if  approved  by  him,  to 
put  it  in  execution.  Tlie  brief  and  memorable  judgment 
of  Aristides  was,  that,  while  nothing  could  be  more  ad- 
vantageous to  Athens,  nothing  could  be  more  unjust; 
and  the  Assembly,  responding  at  once,  commanded  that 
the  project  should  be  abandoned.  It  appears  tliat  it 
was  proposed  to  bum  the  combined  Greek  fleet,  then 
enjoying  the  security  of  peace  in  a  neighboring  sea,  and 
thus  confinn  the  naval  supremacy  of  Athens.^  A  simi- 
lar proposition  is  now  brought  before  the  American  Sen- 
ate. You  are  asked  to  destroy  a  safeguard  of  Freedom, 
consecrated  by  solemn  compact,  under  which  the  coun- 
try is  reposing  in  the  security  of  peace,  and  thus  con- 
finn tlie  supremacy  of  Slavery.  To  this  institution  and 
its  partisans  the  proposition  may  seem  advantf^eous ; 
but  nothing  can  be  more  unjust.  Let  the  judgment  of 
tlie  Athenian  democraoy  be  yours. 

This  is  what  I  have  to  say  upon  this  head.     I  now 
pass  to  the  second  branch  of  the  argument. 
1  Plutarch,  Themistooles. 


■cibyGoogIc 


KO   EEPEAL  OF  THE  JHSSOURI   COMPEOMISE.        317 


II. 

Mr.  Presidext,  —  It  is  not  only  as  an  infraction  of 
solemn  compact,  embodied  in  ancient  law,  that  I  oppose 
this  bill;  I  arraign  it  as  a  flagrant  and  extravagant 
departure  from  the  oiiginal  policy  of  our  fathers,  con- 
secrated by  their  lives,  opinions,  and  acts. 

[Here  Mr.  Sumner  proceeded  to  set  forth  the  Antiskvery  policy  at 
the  foundation  of  the  Government,  —  lesa  fully  than  in  the  earlier 
speech,  Freed'/m  Natiinial,  Slamery  SecHonM,  hut  suhstantially  in  the 
same  vein.  After  alluding  to  the  memorial  of  Franklin,  addressed  to 
the  first  Congress  under  the  Constitntion,  he  proceeded  as  follows.] 

The  memorial  of  Franklin,  with  other  memorials  of  a 
similar  character  was  referred  to  a  Committee,  and  much 
debated  in  the  House  ■«  hich  finally  sanctioned  the  fol- 
lowing resohition  M.\  hie  ted  the  same  to  be  entered 
upon  its  Journals  nimel>    — 

"  That  Congre  s  have  nn  authority  to  interfere  in  the 
emanoipatiou  of  laves  oi  n  the  treatment  of  them,  within 
any  of  the  States  ;  it  remaining  with  the  several  States  alone 
to  provide  any  regulations  tlierein  which  humanity  and  true 
policy  may  require."^ 

This  resolution,  declaring  the  principle  of  non-inter- 
vention hy  Congress  with  Slavery  in  the  States,  wag 
adopted  by  the  same  Congress  which  had  solemnly 
affirmed  the  Prohibition  of  Slavery  in  all  the  existing 
territory  of  the  Union ;  so  that  one  may  be  regarded  as 
the  complement  of  the  other.  And  it  is  on  these  double 
acts,  at  the  first  organization  of  the  Government,  and 
the  recorded  sentiments  of  the  founders,  that  I  take  my 
stand,  and  challenge  all  question. 

In  the  country,  at  tliis  time,  there  was  strictly  no 
1  Annals  of  Congress,  1st  Cong.  2d  Sess.,  H.  Uli  -  74,  March  23,  irso. 


■cibyGoogIc 


318  THE  LANDMARK  OF  FKEEDOM  : 

dividing  line  between  Antislaveiy  and  Proslavery.  The 
Aiitislavery  sentiment  was  thoroughly  national,  broad 
and  gener^,  pervading  alike  all  parts  of  the  Union,  and 
uprising  from  the  common  heait  of  the  entire  people, 
lie  Proslavery  interest  was  strictly  personal  and  pecu- 
niary, and  bad  its  source  simply  in  the  self-interest  of 
indlYidual  slaveholders.  It  contemplated  Slavery  only 
as  a  domestic  institution,  not  as  a  political  element, 
and  merely  stipulated  for  its  security  where  it  actually 
existed  within  the  States. 

Sir,  the  original  policy  of  the  country,  begun  under 
the  Confederation,  and  recognized  at  the  initiation  of 
the  new  Government,  is  clear  and  unmistakable.  Com- 
pendiously expressed,  it  was  non-intero&idion  h/  Congress 
with  Slavery  in  the  States,  and  its  prohibition  in  all  the 
national  domain.  In  this  way  discordant  feelings  on 
this  subject  were  reconciled.  Slave-masters  were  left  at 
home  in  their  respective  States,  under  the  protection  of 
local  laws,  to  hug  Slavery  without  interference  from  Con- 
gress, while  all  opposed  to  it  were  exempted  from  any 
responsibility  therefor  in  the  national  doniain.  This,  Sir, 
is  the  common  ground  on  which  our  political  fabric  was 
reared ;  and  I  do  not  hesitate  to  say  that  it  is  the  only 
ground  on  which  it  can  stand  in  permanent  peace. 

Our  Eepublic  has  swollen  in  population  and  power, 
but  it  has  shrunk  in  character.  It  is  not  now  what  it 
was  in  the  beginning,  a  Republic  merely  permitting, 
while  it  regretted  Slavery,  —  tolerating  it  only  where  it 
could  not  be  removed,  and  interdicting  it  where  it  did 
not  exist,- — but  a  mighty  Propagandist,  openly  favoring 
and  vindicating  it,  —  visiting,  also,  with  displeasure  all 
who  oppose  it. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   REPEAL  OF  THE  MtSSOTJEI  COMPROMISE.        319 

Sir,  our  country  early  reached  lieights  wliicli  it  could 
not  keep.  Its  fall  was  gentle,,  but  complete.  At  the 
session  of  Congress  immediately  following  the  ratifica- 
tion of  the  Prohibition  of  Slavery  in  the  national  do- 
main, a  transfer  of  the  territory  now  constituting  Ten- 
nessee was  accepted  from  North  Carolina  (2d  April, 
1790),  loaded  with  the  express  proviso,  "  that  no  regula- 
tions made  or  to  he  made  by  Congress  shall  tend  to 
emancipate  slaves":  a  formal  provision,  which,  while 
admitting  the  power  of  Congress  over  Slavery  in  the 
Territories,  waived  the  prevailing  policy  of  executing  it. 
This  was  followed,  in  1798,  by  the  transfer  from  Georgia 
of  the  region  between  her  present  western  limit  and  the 
Mississippi,  under  a  similar  condition.  In  hotli  these 
cases  apology  may  be  found  in  the  very  terms  of  the 
transfer,  and  in  the  fact  that  the  region  constituted  part 
of  two  States  where  Slavery  actually  existed,  —  though 
it  will  be  confessed  tliat  even  here  there  was  a  descent 
from  that  summit  of  Freedom  on  which  the  Nation  had 
so  proudly  rested. 

Without  tracing  this  downward  course  throi^h  its 
snccessive  stages,  let  me  refer  to  facts  which  too  palpa- 
bly reveal  the  abyss  that  has  been  reached.  Early  in 
our  history  no  man  was  disqualified  for  public  ofilce  by 
reason  of  liis  opinions  on  this  subject ;  and  this  condi- 
tion continued  for  a  long  period.  As  late  as  1820,  John 
W.  Taylor,  Bepresentative  from  New  York,  who  pressed 
with  so  much  energy,  not  merely  the  prohibition  of 
Slavery  in  the  Territories,  but  its  restriction  in  the  State 
of  Missouri,  was  elected  to  the  chair  of  Henry  Clay,  as 
Speaker  of  the  other  House.  It  is  needless  to  add,  that 
no  determined  supporter  of  the  prohibition  of  Slaverj'' 
in  the  Territories  at  this  day  could  expect  that  eminent 


■cibyGoogIc 


320  THE  L4NDMARK  OF  FEEEDOM : 

trust To  such  lowest  deep  has  our  Government 


These  things  prepare  us  to  comprehend  the  true  char- 
acter of  the  change  with  regard  to  the  Ten-itories.  In 
17S7  all  existing  national  domain  was  promptly  and 
unanimously  dedicated  to  Freedom,  without  opposition 
or  criticism.  The  interdict  of  Slavery  then  covered 
every  inch  of  soil  belonging  to  the  National  Glovem- 
ment.  Louisiana,  an  immense  region  heyond  the  hounds 
of  the  original  States^  was  subsequently  acquired,  and 
in  1820,  after  a  vehement  struggle  which  shook  the 
whole  land,  discomfited  Freedom  was  compelled,  by  a 
dividing  hne,  to  a  partition  with  Slavery.  This  arrange- 
ment, which,  in  its  very  terms,  was  exclusively  apphca- 
ble  to  a  particular  territory  purchased  from  R'anee,  has 
been  accepted  as  final  down  to  the  present  session  of 
Congress ;  but  now.  Sir,  here  in  1854,  Freedom  is  sud- 
denly summoned  to  surrender  even  her  hard-won  moiety. 
Here  are  the  three  stages :  at  the  first,  aU  consecrated 
to  Freedom;  at  the  second,  only  half;  at  the  third,  all 
grasped  by  Slavery.  The  original  policy  of  the  Gov- 
ernment is  absolutely  reversed.  Slavery,  which  at  the 
beginning  was  a  sectional  institution,  with  no  foothold 
anywhere  on  the  National  Territory,  is  now  exalted  as 
national,  and  all  our  broad  domain  is  threatened  by  its 
blighting  shadow. 

Thus  much  for  what  I  have  to  say,  at  this  time,  of 
the  original  policy,  consecrated  by  the  lives,  opinions, 
and  acts  of  our  fathers.  Certain  reasons  are  adduced  for 
the  proposed  departure  from  their  gi'eat  example,  which, 
though  of  little  validity,  I  would  not  pass  in  silence. 

The  Prohibition  of  Slavery  in  the  Territories  is  as- 


■cibyGooglc 


NO   REPEAL  OF  THE   MISSOURI   COMPROMISE.        321 

aaOed,  as  beyond  the  power  of  Congress,  and  an  infringe- 
ment of  local  sovereignty.  On  this  account,  at  this  late 
day,  it  ia  pronounced  unconstitutional.  Now,  without 
considering  minutely  the  sources  from  which  the  power 
of  Congress  over  the  national  domain  is  derived,  — 
whether  from  express  grant  in  the  Constitution  to  make 
rules  and  regulations  for  the  government  of  the  Terri- 
tory, or  from  power,  necessarily  implied,  to  govern  ter- 
ritory acquired  by  conquest  or  purchase,  —  it  seems  to 
me  impossible  to  deny  its  existence,  without  invalidat- 
ii^  a  large  portion  of  the  legislation  of  the  country, 
from  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution  down  to  the 
present  day.  This  power  was  asserted  before  the  Con- 
stitution It  was  not  denied  or  prohibited  by  the  Con- 
stitution itself  Exercised  from  the  first  existence  of 
the  Government,  it  has  been  recognized  by  the  three 
depaitments,  Evecutive,  Legislative,  and  Judicial.  Pre- 
cedents of  eveiy  kmd  are  thick  in  its  support.  Indeed, 
the  very  bill  now  before  us  assumes  a  conti-ol  of  the 
Territory  clearly  inconsistent  with  those  principles  of 
sovereignty  which  are  said  to  be  violated  by  Congres- 
sional prohibition  of  Slaveiy. 

Here  are  provisions  determining  the  main  features 
of  the  Government,  the  distribution  of  powers  in  the 
Kxecutive,  Legislative,  and  Judicial  departments,  and 
the  manner  m  which  they  shall  be  respectively  consti- 
tuted, —  securing  to  the  President,  with  the  consent  of 
the  Senate,  the  appointment  of  Governor,  Secretary,  and 
Judges,  and  to  the  people  only  the  election  of  the  Legis- 
lature, —  and  even  ordaining  the  qualifications  of  vot- 
ers, the  salaries  of  the  public  officers,  and  the  daily  com- 
pensation of  the  members  of  the  legislature.  Surely,  if 
Congress  may  establish  these  provisions,  without  inter- 


■cibyGooglc 


322  THE   LA.NDMAEK   OF  FREEDOM: 

ference  with  the  rights  of  territorial  sovereignty,  it  is 
absurd  to  say  that  it  may  not  also  prohibit  Slavery. 

In  this  very  hill  there  is  an  express  prohibition  on  the 
Territory,  borrowed  from  the  Ordinance  of  1787,  and  re- 
peated in  eveiy  Act  oi^anizing  a  Territory,  or  even  a  new 
State,  down  to  the  present  time,  where  it  is  expressly 
declared  that  "  no  tax  shall  be  imposed  upon  the  prop- 
erty of  the  United  States."  Now  here  is  a  clear  and  un- 
questionable restriction  upon  the  Territories  and  States, 
The  public  lands  of  the  United  States,  situated  witliin 
an  oi^nized  Temtory  or  State,  cannot  be  regarded  as 
the  imtruijients  and  means  necessary  and  proper  to  ex- 
ecute the  sovere^n  powers  of  the  nation,  hke  fortifica- 
tions, arsenals,  and  navy-yards.  They  are  strictly  in  the 
nature  of  p'>^vate  property  of  the  nation,  and  as  such, 
unleas  exempted  by  the  foregoing  prohibition,  would 
clearly  be  within  the  scope  of  local  taxation,  Hable,  like 
the  lands  of  other  proprietors,  to  all  customary  burdens 
and  incidents.  Mr.  Justice  Woodbury  has  deelai'ed,  in 
a  weU-considered  judgment,  that,  "where  the  United 
States  own  land  situated  within  the  Hmits  of  particular 
States,  and  over  which  they  have  no  cession  of  jurisdic- 
tion, for  objects  either  special  or  general,  little  doubt 
exists  that  the  rights  and  remedies  in  relation  to  it 
are  usually  such  as  apply  to  other  land-owners  within 
the  State."  ^  I  assume,  then,  that  without  this  prohi- 
bition these  lands  would  be  hable  to  taxation.  Does 
any  one  question  this  ?  Nobody.  The  conclusion,  then, 
follows,  that  by  this  prohibition  you  propose  to  deprive 
the  present  Territory,  as  you  have  deprived  other  TeiTi- 
tories,  —  ay,  and  States,  —  of  an  essential  portion  of  its 
sovereignty, 

1  United  States  v.  Ames,  1  Woodbury  &  Minot,  80. 


;db,Googlc 


NO   REPEAL   OF  THE  MISSOURI  COMPROMISE.        323 

And  these,  Sir,  are  not  vain  -woids.  The  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  has  given  great  promi- 
nence to  the  sovereign  right  of  taxation  in  the  States. 
In  the  case  of  Providence  Bwiik  v.  Billings  and  FUtman, 
4  Peters,  561,  they  declare,  — 

"  That  the  taxing  power  ia  of  vital  importance  ;  that  it  is 
essential  to  the  existence  of  Government ;  that  the  rehnquish- 
ment  of  such  a  power  is  never  to  be  assumed." 
And  i^in,  in  the  case  of  Bohbins  v.  Cmnmisdoners  of 
Brie  Goimty,  16  Petei-s,  447,  they  say:  — 

"Taxation  is  a  sacred  right,  essential  to  the  existence  of 
Gtwemmenl,  an  incipient  of  sovereig-aiy.  The  right  of  legis- 
lation is  coextensive  with  the  mcident,  to  attach  it  upon  all 
persons  and  property  within  the  jurisdiction  of  a  State." 

Now  I  call  upon  Senators  to  remark,  that  this  sacred 
right,  reputed  so  essential  to  the  very  existence  of  Gov- 
ernment, is  abridged  in  the  bill  before  tis. 

For  myself,  I  do  not  doubt  the  power  of  Congress  to 
fasten  this  restriction  upon  the  Territory,  and  afterwards 
upon  the  State,  as  is  always  done ;  but  I  am  at  a  loss  to 
see  on  what  grounds  this  rcvstriction  can  be  placed,  which 
will  not  also  support  the  Prohibition  of  Slavery.  The 
former  is  an  unquestionable  infringement  of  sovereignty, 
as, declared  by  out  Supreme  Court,  far  more  than  can  he 
asserted  of  the  latter. 

I  am  \tnwiUing  to  admit,  Sir,  that  the  Prohibition  of 
Slavery  in  the  Territories  is  in  any  jnst  sense  an  in- 
fringement of  local  sovereignty.  Slavery  is  an  infrac- 
tion of  the  immutable  Law  of  Nature,  and  as  such  can- 
not be  considered  a  natural  incident  to  any  sovereignty, 
especially  in  a  country  which  has  solemnly  declared,  in 
its  Declaration  of  Independence,  the  unalienable  tight  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


324  THE  LASDMA.EK  OF  FREEDOM: 

all  men  to  life,  liherty,  and  the  pursuit  of  happiness.  In 
an  age  of  civilization,  and  in  a  land  of  rights.  Slavery 
may  still  he  tolerated  in  fact;  but  its  prohibition  within 
a  municipal  jurisdiction  by  the  government  thereof  — 
as  by  one  of  the  States  of  the  Union,  —  cannot  be  con- 
sidered an  infraction  of  natural  rights ;  nor  can  its  pro- 
hibition by  Congress  in  the  Tenitoriea  be  regarded  as 
an  infringement  of  local  sovere^nty,  founded,  as  it  must 
be,  on  natuiul  rights. 

Then  comes  another  ailment,  most  fallacious  in  its 
character.  It  is  asserted,  that,  inasmuch  as  the  Terri- 
tories were  acc^nired  by  the  common  treasure,  they  are 
the  common  property  of  the  whole  Union,  and  there- 
fore no  citizen  can  be  prevented  from  carrying  into 
them  his  slaves,  without  infringement  of  tlie  equal 
rights  and  privileges  which  belong  to  him  as  a  citizen  of 
tlie  United  States.  But  it  is  admitted  that  the  people 
of  tliis  very  Territory,  when  organized  as  a  State,  may 
exclude  slaves,  and  in  this  way  abridge  an  asserted  right, 
founded  on  the  common  property  in  the  Territory.  Now, 
if  this  can  be  done  by  the  few  thousand  settlers  who 
constitute  the  State  Glovernment,  the  whole  alignment 
founded  on  the  acquisition  of  the  Territories  by  a  com- 
mon treasure  is  futile  and  evanescent. 

But  this  argument  proceeds  on  an  assumption  which 
cannot  stand.  It  assumes  that  Slavery  is  a  National  In- 
stitution, and  that  property  in  slaves  is  reci^nized  by 
the  Constitution  of  the  United  States.  Nothing  can  be 
more  false.  By  the  judgment  of  the  Supienie  Court  of 
the  United  States,  and  also  by  the  principles  of  the  Com- 
mon Law,  Slavery  is  a  local  municipal  institution,  de- 
riving its  support  exclusively  from  local  municipal  laws, 
and  beyond  the  sphere  of  these  laws  it  ceases  to  exist. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   EEPEAL  OF  THE  MISSOUEI  COMPROMISE.       325 

except  so  far  as  it  may  be  preserved  by  the  uncertain 
clause  for  tlie  rendition  of  fugitives  from  service.  Mad- 
ison thought  it  wrong  to  admit  in  the  Constitution  the 
idea  that  there  can  be  property  in  men ;  and  I  rejoice  to 
believe  that  no  snch  idea  can  be  found  there.  The  Con- 
stitution regards  slaves  always  aa  "  persons,"  with  the 
rights  of  "persons,"  —  never  as  property.  When  it  is  said, 
therefore,  that  every  citizen  may  enter  the  national  do- 
main with  his  property,  it  does  not  follow,  by  any  rule 
of  logic  or  of  law,  that  he  may  carry  his  slaves.  On  the 
contrary,  he  can  caiTy  only  that  property  which  is  ad- 
mitted such  by  the  universal  Law  of  Katnre,  written  by 
God's  own  finger  on  the  heart  of  man.  In  vain  do  you 
speak  of  "  rights  "  in  the  Territories,  —  as  if  this  august 
word  could  be  profaned  to  characterize  such  a  claim. 

Tlie  relation  of  master  and  slave  is  sometimes  classed 
with  the  "  domestic  relations."  Now,  while  it  is  unques- 
tionably among  the  powers  of  any  State,  within  its  own 
jurisdiction,  to  change  the  existing  relation  of  husband 
and  wife,  and  to  establish  polygamy,  I  presume  no  per- 
son would  contend  that  a  polygamous  husband,  resident 
in  one  of  the  States,  would  be  entitled  to  enter  the  Na- 
tional Territory  with  his  harem,  —  his  property,  if  you 
please,  —  and  there  claim  immunity.  Clearly,  when  he 
passes  the  bounds  of  that  local  jurisdiction  which  sanc- 
tions polygamy,  the  peculiar  domestic  relation  would 
cease :  aiid  it  is  precisely  tlie  same  with  Slavery, 

Sir,  I  dismiss  these  considerations.  The  Prohibition 
of  Slavery  in  the  Territory  of  Kansas  and  Nebraska 
stands  on  foundations  of  livii^  rock,  upheld  by  the 
early  policy  of  the  Fathers,  by  constant  precedent,  and 
time-honored  compact.    It  is  now  in  your  power  to  over- 


■cibyGooglc 


S2Q  THE  LANDMAEK  OF  FREEDOM: 

turn  it;  you  may  remove  the  sacred  landmark,  and  open 
the  whole  vast  domain  to  Slavery.  To  you  is  committed 
this  high  prerogative.  Our  fathers,  on  the  eve  of  the 
Eevolution,  set  forth  in  burning  words,  among  their  griev- 
ances, that  Geo^e  the  Third,  "  determined  to  keep  open  a 
market  where  men  should  be  bought  and  sold,  had  pros- 
tituted his  negative  for  suppressing  every  legislative  at- 
tempt to  prohibit  or  to  restrain  this  execrable  commerce."* 
Sir,  like  the  English  monarch,  you  may  now  prostitute 
your  power  to  this  same  purpose.  But  you  cannot  escape 
the  judgment  of  the  world,  nor  the  doom  of  histoiy. 

It  will  he  in  vain,  that,  while  doing  this  thing,  you 
plead  in  apology  the  principle  of  self-ffovemment,  which 
you  profess  to  recognize  in  the  Territories.  Sir,  this 
very  principle,  when  truly  administered,  secures  equal 
rights  to  aH,  without  distinction  of  race  or  color,  and 
makes  Slavery  impossible.  By  no  rule  of  justice,  and 
by  no  subtilty  of  pohtical  metaphysics,  can  the  right 
to  hold  a  fellow-man  in  bondage  be  regarded  as  essen- 
tial to  self-government.  The  mconsistency  is  too  fla- 
grant. It  is  apparent  on  the  bare  statement,  It  is  like 
saying  two  and  ttim  make  three.  In  the  name  of  Lih- 
erty  yon  open  the  door  to  Slavery.  With  professions 
of  Eq^ual  Eights  on  the  lips,  you  trample  on  the  rights 
of  Human  Nature.  With  a  kiss  upon  the  brow  of  that 
fan-  Territory,  you  betray  it  to  wretchedness  and  sliame. 
Well  did  the  patriot  soul  exclaim,  in  bitter  words,  wrung 
out  by  bitter  experience,  "  0  Liberty,  wliat  crimes  are 
committed  in  thy  name  ! "  ^ 

In  vain.  Sir,  you  will  plead  that  this  measure  pro- 

'  First  Dmught  of  the  Declardtiim  of  Independence:  JelVerBen's  Writings 
Vol.  I.  p.  33. 
^  "  OLEbert*,que  (le  crimes  on  ceramet  en  ton  iiom  I  "  —  Mme.  Rolakd. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   EEPEAL  OF  THE  MISSOURI   COMPEOMISE.        32^ 

ceeds  from  the  Nortli,  as  has  been  suggested  by  the 
Senator  from  Kentucky  [Mr.  Dixon].  Even  if  this 
■were  true,  it  would  be  no  apology.  But,  precipitated 
upon  the  Senate,  as  tliis  bill  has  been,  at  a  moment 
of  general  calm,  and  in  the  absence  of  any  controlling 
exigency,  and  then  himried  to  a  vote  in  advance  of  the 
public  voice,  as  if  fearful  of  arrest,  it  cannot  justly  be 
called  tlie  offspring  of  any  popular  sentiment.  In  this 
respect  it  differs  widely  from  the  Missouri  Prohibition, 
■which  was  adopted  only  after  solemn  debate,  extending 
through  two  sessions  of  Congress,  and  ample  discussion 
before  the  people.  As  yet,  there  is  no  evidence  that 
this  attempt,  though  espoused  by  Northern  politicians, 
proceeds  from  that  Northern  sentiment  which  throbs  and 
glows,  strong  and  fresh,  in  the  schools,  the  churches,  and 
the  homes  of  the  people.  Po^vli  omnes  ad  aquilokem 
podti  Libertaiem  quandam  spirant}  And  could  the 
abomination  which  you  seek  to  perpetrate  be  now  sub- 
mitted to  the  awakened  milhons  whose  souls  are  truly 
ripened  under  Northern  skies,  it  ■would  be  flouted  at 
once,  with  indignant  and  undying  scorn. 

But  the  race  of  men,  "wliite  slaves  of  the  North," 
described  and  despised  by  a  Southern  statesman,  is  not 
yet  extinct  there.  Sir.  It  is  one  of  the  melancholy  to- 
kens of  the  power  of  Slavery,  under  our  political  system, 
and  especially  through  the  operations  of  the  National 
Government,  that  it  loosens  and  destroys  the  character 
of  Northern  men,  exerting  its  subtle  influence  even  at 
a  distance,  —  like  the  black  magnetic  mountain  in  the 
Arabian  story,  under  whose  irresistible  attraction,  the 
iron  bolts  which  held  together  the  strong  timbers  of  a 
stately  ship,  floating  securely  ontlie  distant  wave,  were 

I  Bodiniia,  de  Republica,  Lib.  I.  cap.  S,  p.  90. 


;db,Googlc 


328  THE  LANDMARK   OP  FEBEDOM  : 

drawn  out,  till  the  whole  fell  apart,  and  hecame  a  dis- 
jointed wreck.  Alas !  too  often  those  principles  which 
give  consistency,  individuality,  and  form  to  the  North- 
em  character,  which  render  it  stanch,  strong,  and  seawor- 
thy, which  hind  it  together  aa  witii  iron,  are  sucked  out, 
one  hy  one,  like  the  holts  of  tlie  ill-fated  vessel,  and 
from  the  miserable  loosened  fragments  is  formed  that 
human  anomaly,  a  Morth^m  man  with  Southern  princi- 
ples.    Sir,  no  such  man  can  speak  for  the  North. 

[Here  there  was  au  interruption  of  prolonged  applause  in  tlio  gal- 
leries,] 

The  Pebsidekt  (Mr.  Stuart  in  tho  chair).  The  Chair 
will  be  obliged  to  direct  the  galleries  to  be  cleared,  if  order 
is  not  preserved.     No  applause  will  be  ejlowed. 

Sbvebal  Voices.     Let  them  be  cleared  now. 

Me.  Sumnek,  Mr.  President,  this  hill  is  proposed  as 
a  measure  of  peace.  In  this  way  you  vainly  thuik  to 
withdraw  the  subject  of  Slavery  fi'om  National  Pohtics. 
This  is  a  mistake.  Peace  depends  on  mutual  coniidence. 
It  can  never  rest  secure  on  broken  i'aith  and  injustice. 
Permit  me  to  say,  frankly,  sincerely,  and  earnestly,  that 
the  subject  of  Slavery  can  never  be  withdrawn  from 
the  National  Politics  until  we  return  once  more  to  the 
origiual  policy  of  our  fathers,  at  the  first  organization  of 
the  Govemnient  under  Washington,  when  the  national 
ensign  nowhere  on  the  National  Territory  covered  a 
single  slave. 

Amidst  all  seeming  discouragements,  the  great  omens 
are  with  us.  Art,  literatme,  poetry,  religion,  evcrytliing 
which  elevates  man,  all  are  on  our  side.  The  plough, 
the  steam-engine,  the  railroad,  the  tel^'raph,  the  hook. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO   EEPEAL   OF  THE  MIS80TJEI  00MPE3MISB.        329 

eveiy  humaa  improvement,  every  generoiis  word  any- 
where, every  true  pulsation  of  every  heart  which  is  not 
a  mere  mitsele  and  nothing  else,  gives  new  eneonrage- 
ment  to  the  warfare  with  Slavery.  The  discussion  will 
proceed.  Wherever  an  election  occurs,  there  this  ques- 
tion will  arise.  Wherever  men  come  tc^ether  to  apeak 
of  puhlic  affairs,  there  again  will  it  he.  No  pohtical 
Joshua  now,  with  miraculous  power,  can  stop  the  sun 
in  its  eoui'se  through  the  heavens.  It  is  even  now  re- 
joicing, lite  a  strong  man,  to  run  its  race,  and  will  yet 
send  its  beams  into  the  most  distant  plantations,  melt- 
ing the  chains  of  every  slave. 

But  this  movement,  or  agitation,  as  it  is  reproachfully 
called,  is  boldly  pronounced  injurious  to  the  very  object 
desired.  Kow,  witliout  entering  into  details,  which  nei- 
ther time  nor  the  occasion  justifies,  let  me  say  that  this 
objection  belongs  to  those  commonplftces  which  have 
been  arrayed  against  every  good  movement  in  the 
world's  history,  against  even  knowledge  itself,  against 
the  abolition  of  the  slave-trade.  Perhaps  it  was  not 
unnatural  for  the  Senator  fi?om  North  Carolina  [Mr. 
Badgbe]  to  press  it,  even  as  vehemently  as  he  did ;  but  it 
sounded  less  natural,  when  it  came,  though  in  more  mod- 
erate phrase,  from  my  distinguished  friend  and  colleague 
ft«m  Massachusetts  [Mr.  Everett].  The  past  furnishes 
a  controlling  example  by  which  its  true  character  may 
be  determined.  Call  to  mind.  Sir,  that  the  efforts  of 
William  Wilberforce  encountered  this  precise  objection, 
and  that  the  condition  of  the  kidnapped  slave  was  then 
vindicated,  in  language  not  unlilie  that  of  the  Senator 
from  North  Carohna,  by  no  less  a  person  than  the  Duke 
of  Clarence,  of  the  royal  family  of  Great  Britain.  In 
what  was  called  his  maiden  speech,  on  the  3d  of  May, 


■cibyGoogIc 


330  THE   LANDMARK   OF  FREEDOM: 

1792,  and  preserved  in  the  Parliamentary  Detales,  lie 
said:  "The  negroes  were  not  treated  in  the  manner 
which  had  30  much  agitated  the  public  mind.  He  had 
been  an  attentive  observer  of  their  state,  and  had  no 
doubt  but  he  could  bring  forward  proofs  to  convince 
their  Lordships  that  their  state  was  far  from  being  mis- 
erable :  on  the  contrary,  that,  when  the  various  ranks  of 
society  were  considered,  tliey  were  comparatively  in  a 
state  of  humble  happiness."  And  only  the  next  year, 
this  same  royal  prince,  in  debate  in  the  House  of  Lords, 
asserted  that  the  promoters  of  the  abohtion  of  the  slave- 
trade  were  "either  fanatics  or  hypocrites,"  and  in  one 
of  these  classes  he  ranked  Wilbeiforce.  Mark  now  the 
end.  After  years  of  weary  effort,  the  slave-trade  was 
finally  abolished ;  and  at  last,  in  1833,  the  early  vindi- 
cator of  this  enormity,  the  maligner  of  a  name  hallowed 
among  men,  was  brought  to  give  liis  royal  assent,  as 
WiUiam  the  Fourth,  King  of  Great  Britain,  to  the  im- 
mortal Act  of  Parliament,  greater  far  than  any  victory 
of  war,  by  which  Slavery  was  abolished  throughout  the 
British  dominions.  Sir,  time  and  the  universal  con- 
science have  vindicated  the  labors  of  Wilberforee.  The 
movement  a^inst  American  Slavery,  protected  by  the 
august  names  of  Washington,  Franlilin,  and  Jefferson, 
can  calmly  await  a  similar  judgment. 

Sometimes  it  is  said  that  this  movement  is  dangerous 
to  the  Union.  In  this  sohcitude  I  cannot  share.  As  a 
lover  of  concord,  and  a  jealous  partisan  of  all  that  makes 
for  peace,  I  am  always  glad  to  express  my  attachment 
to  the  Union ;  but  I  believe  that  this  bond  will  be  most 
truly  preserved  and  most  beneficently  extended  (for  I 
shrink  from  no  expansion  where  Fi'eedom  leads  the 
way)  by  firmly  upholding  those  principles  of  Liberty 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO  EEPKAL  OF  THE  MISSOUEI   COMPKOMISE.        331 

and  Justice  which  weie  its  early  corner-stones.  The 
true  danger  to  this  Union  proceeds  not  from  any  aban- 
donment of  the  "  peculiar  institution  "  of  the  South,  but 
from  the  abandonment  of  the  spirit  in  which  the  Union 
was  formed,  —  not  from  any  warfare  upon  Slavery  with- 
in the  hmita  of  the  Constitution,  but  from  warfare  upon 
Freedom,  like  that  waged  by  this  very  bUL  The  Union 
is  most  precious ;  but  more  precious  far  are  that  "general 
welfare,"  that  "  domestic  tranquOIity,"  and  those  "  bless- 
ings of  Liberty"  which  it  was  established  to  secure, — 
all  which  are  now  wantonly  endangered.  Not  that  I 
love  the  Union  less,  but  Freedom  more,  do  I  now,  in 
pleading  this  great  cause,  insist  that  Freedom,  at  all 
hazards,  shall  be  preserved. 

The  great  master,  Shakespeare,  who  with  all-seeing 
mortal  eye  observed  mankind,  and  with  immortal  pen 
depicted  the  manners  as  they  rise,  has  presented  a  scene 
which  may  be  read  with  advantage  by  all  who  would 
plunge  the  South  into  tempestuous  quarrel  with  the 
North.  I  refer  to  the  well-known  passage  between 
Brutus  and  Cassias.  Reading  this  remarlaible  dia- 
logue, it  is  difficult  not  to  see  in  Brutus  our  own  North, 
and  in  Caasius  the  South. 


Must  i  give  wiiy  and  room  to  your  rash  clioler? 

"  Cat.    0  ye  goda!  ye  gods  !  must  I  endure  all  thia? 

"Bra.    All  thEs?  Ay,  more;  fret,  till  your  proud  heart  break : 
Go,  dioio  your  slaves  Aout  cioleric  yoa  are. 
And  m'lte  ^oar  botidmea  tremble.     Must  I  bndge  ? 
Mnst  I  observe  you  f    Must  I  stand  and  crouch 
Under  your  testy  humor? 


■cibyGoogIc 


I  THE  LAHDMARK  OF  FREEDOM. 

"  Cat,    Do  not  presume  loo  mncli  upon  my  love ; 
I  may  do  that  I  shall  be  sorry  for. 

"Sra.     I'oa  Aaoe  done  Ikal  ^oa  akoald  be  mrry  fwi 
There  [s  no  terror,  Caasius,  in  your  threats; 
For  I  am  armed  bo  strong  in  honesty, 
That  they  pass  by  me  as  the  idle  wind, 
Which  1  respect  not. 


"  Cag.    You  love  me  not. 

"  Bill.  I  do  not  like  yonc  faults." 

And  the  coUoc[uy  proceeding,  each  finally  comes  to  under- 
stand the  other,  appreciates  his  character  and  attitude, 
and  the  impetuous,  gallant  Cassius  exclaims,  "  Give  me 
your  hand ! "  —  to  which  Brutus  rephes,  "  And  my  heart 
too ! "  Afterwards,  with  hand  and  heart  united,  on  the 
field  of  Pliilippi  they  together  upheld  the  liberties  of 
Eome, 

The  Worth  and  the  South,  Sir,  as  I  fondly  trust,  amidst 
all  differences,  will  ever  have  hand  and  heart  for  each 
other ;  and  believii^  in  the  sure  prevalence  of  Almighty 
Truth,  I  confidently  look  forward  to  the  good  time,  when 
both  will  unite,  according  to  the  sentiments  of  the  Fa- 
thers and  the  true  spirit  of  the  Constitution,  in  declar- 
ing Freedom,  and  not  Slavery,  National,  to  the  end 
tltat  the  Flf^  of  the  Eepnblic,  wherever  it  floats,  on  sea 
or  land,  within  the  National  jurisdiction,  may  cover 
none  hut  freemen.  Then  will  he  achieved  that  Union 
contemplated  at  the  beginning,  against  which  the  storms 
of  faction  and  the  assaults  of  foreign  power  shall  heat 
in  vain,  as  upon  the  Eoek  of  Ages,  —  and  liberty,  seek- 
ing a  firm  foothold,  will  have  at  last  wheeeok  to 

STAND  AND  MOVE  THE  WORLD. 


■cibyGoogIc 


WHEff  WILL  THE  NORTH  BE  ARODSED? 

Letter  to  a  Peksonal  Fbiend,  March  30,  1854, 

The  following  piivate  letter  found  its  way  into  the  public  prints. 

Senate  Chamber,  Mflrct  30,  1854; 

MY  DEAE ;  Your  letter  has  cheered  and 
strengthened  me.  It  came  to  me,  too,  with  pleas- 
ant memories  of  early  life.  As  I  read  it,  the  gates,  of 
the  Past  seemed  to  open,  and  I  saw  again  the  briglit 
fields  of  study  in .  which  we  walked  together. 

Our  battle  here  has  been  severe,  and  much  of  its  brunt 
has  fallen  upon  a  few.  For  weeks  my  trials  and  anxi- 
eties were  intense.  It  is  a  satisfaction  to  know  that 
they  have  found  sjTnpathy  among  good  men. 

But  the  Slave  Power  will  push  ite  tyranny  yet  fur- 
ther, and  there  is  but  one  remedy,  —  Union  at  the  North 
without  distinction  of  party,  to  take  possession  of  the 
National  Government,  and  administer  it  in  the  spirit  of 
Freedom,  and  not  of  Slaveiy.  Oh,  when  wiU  the  North 
be  aroused  I 

Ever  sincerely  yours, 

Charles  Sumner, 


■cibyGoogIc 


A  LIBERTY-LOVING  EMIGRATION  TO  GUARD 

KANSAS. 

Lettek  to  a  Ma^achuhetts  Committee,  May  1,  1854. 


Senate  Chambee,  May  1,  185i. 

MY  DEAE  SIB,  —  I  cannot  be  with  you  at  your 
meeting  on  Wednesday  next :  my  post  of  duty 
is  here.  But  I  must  not  lose  the  opportunity  afforded 
by  your  invitation  to  express  anew  my  abhorrence  of 
the  outrage  upon  Freedom  and  public  faith  attempted 
by-  the  Nebraska  Bill,  and  to  offer  my  gi-atitude  to  those 
who  unite  in  the  good  work  of  opposing  it. 

In  this  warfare  there  is  room  for  every  human  activity. 
By  speech,  vote,  public  meeting,  sermon,  and  prayer,  we 
have  already  striven.  But  a  new  agent  is  now  an- 
nounced. It  is  proposed  to  oi^nize  a  company  of  Lib- 
erty-loving citizeiK,  who  shall  enter  iipon  the  broad 
lands  in  question,  and  by  example,  voice,  and  vote, 
trained  under  the  peculiar  institutions  of  Massachusetts, 
overrule  the  designs  of  slave-masters.  The  purpose  has 
a  nobleness  which  gives  assurance  of  success. 

With  a  heart  full  of  love  for  JIassacbusetts,  her 
schools,  libraries,  churches,  and  happy  homes,  I  should 
hesitate  to  counsel  any  one  to  turn  away  from  her,  a 
voluntary  exile.  I  do  not  venture  such  advice.  But 
if  any  tiere  be  among  us,  to  whom  our  goodly  Com- 
monwealtli  seems  narrow,  and  who  incline  to  cast  their 


■cibyGoogIc 


LIBERTY-LOVING  EMIGRATION  TO  GUAIp  KANSAS.      rfJo 

lines  in  other  places,  —  to  sucli  I  -would  say,  tliat  they 
will  do  well,  while  becoming,  each  for  himself,  the  ar- 
tificer of  Ilia  fortune,  to  enter  into  the  Sacred  Legion 
by  which  Libeity  shall  be  safely  guarded  in  Nebraska 
Thus  will  mingle  public  good  with  pri- 


vate advantage. 

The  Pi^m  Fathei-s  tamed  their  backs  upon  their 
native  land  to  secure  Liberty  for  themselves  and  their 
children.  The  emigiants  whom  yon  organize  have  a 
higher  motive.  Liberty  for  themselves  and  their  chil- 
dren is  already  secured  in  Massachusetts.  They  will 
go  to  secure  Liberty  for  others,  — to  guard  an  immense 
territory  from  the  invasion  of  Slavery,  and  to  dedicate 
it  forever  to  Liberty.  In  such  an  expedition  volun- 
teers may  win  a  victory  of  peace,  which  history  will 
record  with  admiration  and  gratitude. 
Believe  me,  dear  Sir, 

Very  faithfully  yours, 

Charles  Sumneh. 

Thomas  Drew,  Esq.,  Chairman  of  tlie  Committee. 


■cibyGoogIc 


FINAL  PROTEST,  FOR  HIMSELF  AND  THE  CLEKGT  OF 
NEW  ENGLAND,  AGAINST  SLAVERY  IN  NEBRASKA 
AND  KANSAS. 

Speech  in  the  Senate,  oh  the  Nioht  of  the  Final  Passage  of  the 
Nebhaska  and  Kahsas  Bill,  May  25,  1854. 


Amono  the  importtittt  ineideiits  of  tlio  Nebraska  Debate  was  a  pro- 
test from  three  thousand  clergymen  of  New  England,  which  was  se- 
verely denonnced  hy  the  supporters  of  the  aggression,  especially  by 
Mr,  Douglas.  Particular  objection  was  taken  to  the  words,  "  In  the 
name  of  Almighty  God,  and  in  his  presence,"  which  were  employed  by 
the  protestants.  The  heats  on  Ixith  sides  increased.  At  a  later  stage 
Mr.  Sumner  felt  oonstmined  to  speak  again,  which  he  did  for  himself 
and  the  much-abused  clei^.  This  brief  effort  attracted  unusual  atten- 
tion. It  seemed  to  meet  the  rising  eeutinients  of  the  people,  and 
eapeoiftUy  of  the  clergy.  Ect.  Dr.  Allen,  formerly  Ppeaident  of  Bow- 
doin  College,  wrote :  "  Our  Northompton  Gmirier  of  yesterday  con- 
tained your  bold  arid  admirable  midnight  speech.  1  tlianlt  you  for 
wliat  yon  said  for  the  clergy,  but  more  especially  what  you  said  for  the 
country  and  for  Freedom."  Eev.  Dr.  Storrs,  of  Braintree,  Massachu- 
setts, an  eminent  Congi'egationalist,  wrote  :  "I  took  my  pen  only  to 
say  a  single  woi'd,— -to  tell  you  of  my  giuteful  admiration  of  your 
courage,  faitbfiilncss,  and  eloquence  in  defence  of  truth  and  godliness 
against  the  increasing  tide  of  hellish  principles  and  passions."  Kev. 
Theodore  Parker  wrote  :  "  I  liave  had  no  time  to  thank  you  for  your 
noble  speech  till  this  minute.  Hat.  Bowditoh  says  it  is  the  best 
speech  delivered  in  the  Senate  of  the  United  States  in  his  day.  You 
never  did  a.  thing  more  timely,  or  wHeh  will  be  more  warmly  welcomed 
than  this,"  George  S.  Hilkrd,  a  friend  of  many  years,  but  differing 
in  position  on  political  questions,  wrote;  "Your  laat  brief  speech  on 
the  Nebraska  Bill  is  capital.  I  think  it  the  best  speech  you  have  ever 
made.  The  mixture  of  dignity  and  spirit  is  most  happy.  We  are 
going  to  fill  up  that  I'egion  with  free  laboi'ers,  and  secure  it  against 


■cibyGoogIc 


NEBRASKA.  AUD  KANSAS.  337 

Slavery."  John  G.  "Whittier  wrote:  "It  was  the  fitting  won!  ;  it 
entirely  satisfiud  me ;  and  with  a  glow  of  heart  I  thanked  God  that 
.  its  author  was  my  friend."  As  the  speech  received  tJie  Eympathy  of 
friends,  so  it  aroused  all  the  bad  passioniS  on  the  side  of  Slavery.  The 
manifestation  that  ensued  will  appear  in  a  not«  at  the  end. 

The  original  debate  in  the  Senate  on  the  Nebraska  and  Kansas  Bill, 
in  which  Mr.  Sumner  took  part,  vras  closed  by  the  passage  of  that  bill 
—  after  a  protiaeteil  session  throughout  the  night  —  on  the  morning  of 
Saturday,  March  4,  1854,  by  a  vote  of  thirty-seven  yeas  to  fourteen 
nays.  The  bill  was  than  sent  to  the  House  of  Eepresentatives.  It 
was  there  taken  up  and  referred  to  the  Committee  of  the  Whole  ;  but, 
owing  to  the  mass  of  prior  business,  it  became  impossible  to  reach  it. 
Under  these  circumstances,  a  fresh  bill,  neaily  identical  with  that  which 
passed  the  Senate,  was  introduced  and  passed  the  House,  This,  of 
course,  reiiuired  the  attion  of  the  Senate,  On  the  23d  of  May  a  mes- 
sage from  the  House  announced  its  passage,  and  asked  the  conciurence 
of  the  Senate.  It  was  at  once  read  a  first  time ;  but,  on  the  objection 
of  Mr.  Sumner,  Its  second  reading  was  stopped  for  that  day.  The 
next  day,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Douglas,  all  prior  orders  were  postponed 
for  the  purpose  of  consideiing  it.  The  debate  npon  it  continued  during 
that  day  and  the  next.  The  interest  it  excited  was  attested  by  crowded 
galleries  to  the  end.  Among  spectators  on  the  floor  of  the  Senate 
was  the  Earl  of  Elgin,  Governor-General  of  Canada,  with  his  sxute, 
then  in  Washington  to  negotiate  the  Canadian  Beoiprouity  Treaty. 
Late  in  tlie  night  of  tlie  last  day,  after  the  bill  was  reported  to  the 
Senate,  and  the  question  put  by  the  Chair,  "  Shall  the  bill  be  engrossed 
and  read  a  third  time  !  "  Mr.  Sunmer  l«ok  the  floor  and  said  :  — 

ME.  PEESIDENT,  —  It  is  now  midii^ht.  At  this 
late  hour  of  a  session  drawn  out  to  unaccus- 
tomed length,  I  shall  not  fat^e  the  Senate  hy  ai^u- 
ment.  There  is  a  time  for  all  things,  and  the  time 
for  ailment  has  passed.  The  determination  of  the 
majority  is  fixed ;  hut  it  is  not  more  iixed  than  mine. 
The  hill  which  they  sustain  I  oppose.  On  a  former 
occasion  I  met  it  hy  ailment,  which,  though  often 
attacked  in  dehate,  still  stands  unanswered  and  unan- 
swerable. At  present  I  am  admonished  that  I  must  be 
content  with  a  few  words  of  earnest  protest  against  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


338  FINAL  PEOTEST  AGAINST   SLAVERY 

cousummation  of  a  great  wrong.  Duty  to  myself,  and 
also  to  the  honored  Commonwealth  of  which  I  find 
myself  the  sole  representative  in  this  immediate  exi- 
gency, will  not  allow  me  to  do  less. 

But  I  have  a  special  duty,  which  I  would  not  omit. 
Here  on  my  desk  are  remonatances  against  the  passage 
of  this  hill,  some  placed  in  my  hands  since  the  com- 
mencement of  the  debate  to-day,  and  I  desire  tliat  these 
voices,  direct  from  the  people,  should  be  heard.  With 
the  permission  of  the  Senate,  I  wiU  offer  them  now. 

The  PBBsroiNG  Oppicbr  ( Mr.  Stuart  in  the  chair).     The 
remonstranoea  can  be  received  by  unanimous  consent. 
Several  Voices.     Let  them  be  received. 
The  Pbbsidikg  Officer.     The  Chair  hears  no  objection. 

Me.  Sumnee.  Taking  advantage  of  this  permission, 
I  now  present  the  remonstrance  of  a  large  number  of 
citizens  of  New  York  against  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri 
Compromise. 

I  also  present  the  memorial  of  the  religious  Society 
of  Friends  in  Michigan  ^inst  the  passage  of  the  Ne- 
braska Bill,  or  any  other  bill  annulling  the  Missouri 
Compromise  Act  of  1820. 

1  also  present  the  remonstrance  of  the  elei^  and 
laity  of  the  Baptist  denomination  in  Michigan  and 
Indiana  against  the  wrong  and  bad  faith  contemplated 
in  the  Nebraska  Bill 

But  this  is  not  all.  I  hold  in  my  hand,  and  now  pre- 
sent to  the  Senate,  one  hundred  and  twenty-five  sepa- 
rate remonstrances,  from  clergymen  of  every  Protestant 
denomination  in  Mauie,  New  Hampshire,  Vermont,  Mas- 
sachusetts, Ehode  Island,  and  Connecticut,  constituting 
the  six  New  England  States.     These  remonstrances  are 


■cibyGoogIc 


IS   NEBRASKA  AND   KANSAS.  339 

identical  iu  eliaracter  with  tlie  larger  one  presented  ty 
my  distinguished  colleague  [Mr.  Everett],  — whose 
term  of  service  here  ends  in  a  few  days  by  voluntary 
resignation,  and  who  is  now  detained  at  home  by  illness, 
—  and  were  originaUy  intended  as  part  of  it,  but  did 
not  arrive  in  season  for  annexation  to  that  interesting 
and  weighty  document  They  are  independent  in  form, 
though  supplementary  in  nature,  helping  to  swell  the 
protest  of  the  pulpits  of  New  England. 

With  pleasure  and,  pride  I  now  do  tliis  service,  and 
at  this  last  stage  interpose  the  sanctity  of  the  pulpits 
of  New  England  to  arrest  an  alanoing  outrt^e,  — be- 
lieving that  the  remonstrants,  from  their  eminent  char- 
acter and  influence  as  representatives  of  the  iuteU^ence 
and  conscience  of  the  country,  are  peculiarly  entitled 
to  he  heard,  —  and,  further,  heUeving  that  their  remon- 
strances, while  respectful  in  foim,  embody  just  con- 
clusions, hoth  of  opinion  and  fact  like  them.  Sir,  I 
do  not  hesitate  to  protest  against  the  hill  yet  pending 
hefore  the  Senate,  as  a  great  moral  wroi^,  as  a  breach 
of  public  faith,  as  a  measure  full  of  dai^er  to  the  peace, 
and  even  existence,  of  our  Union,  And,  Sir,  believing 
in  God,  as  I  profoundly  do,  I  cannot  doubt  that  the 
opening  of  an  immense  region  to  so  great  an  enormity 
as  Slavery  is  calculated  to  draw  down  upon  our  country 
his  righteous  jui^ments. 

"  In  the  name  of  Almighty  God,  and  in  his  presence," 
these  remonstrants  protest  s^ainst  the  Nebraska  Bill.  In 
this  solemn  language,  most  strangely  pronounced  blas- 
phemous on  this  floor,  there  ia  obviously  no  assumption 
of  ecclesiastical  power,  as  is  perversely  charged,  but  sim- 
ply a  devout  observance  of  the  Scriptural  injunction, 
"Whatsoever  ye  do,  in  word  or  deed,  do  all  in  the  name 


■cibyGoogIc 


340  FINAL   PROTEST  AGAINST   SLAVEEY 

of  the  Lord."  Let  me  add,  also,  that  these  remonstrants, 
in  this  very  language,  have  followed  the  example  of  the 
Senate,  which,  at  our  present  session,  has  ratified  at  least 
one  important  treaty  teginning  with  these  precise  words, 
"  In  the  name  of  Almighty  God."  Surely,  if  the  Senate 
may  thus  assume  to  speak,  the  clei^y  may  do  likewise, 
without  imputation  of  blasphemy,  or  any  just  criticism, 
at  least  in  this  body, 

I  am  unwilling,  particularly  at  this  time,  to  be  betrayed 
into  anything  like  a  defence  of  the  .clergy.  Tliey  need  no 
such  thing  at  my  hands.  There  are  men  in  this  Senate 
justly  eminent  for  eloquence,  learning,  and  ability ;  but 
there  is  no  man  here  competait,  except  in  his  own  con- 
ceit, to  sit  in  judgment  on  the  cleigy  of  New  England. 
Honorable  Senators,  so  swift  with  criticism  and  sarcasm, 
might  proiit  by  their  example.  Perhaps  the  Senator 
from  South  Carolina  [Mr.  Butlee],  who  is  not  insensible 
to  scholarship,  might  learn  from  them  something  of  its 
graces.  Perhaps  the  Senator  from  Vii^ia  [Mr.  Masoh], 
■who  finds  no  sanction  under  the  Constitution  for  any 
remonstrance  from  clei^men,  might  learn  from  them 
something  of  the  privileges  of  an  American  citizen. 
And  perhaps  the  Senator  from  Illinois  [Mr.  Douglas], 
who  precipitated  this  odious  measure  upon  the  country, 
might  learn  from  them  something  of  political  wisdom. 
Sir,  from  the  iiret  settlement  of  these  shores,  from  those 
early  days  of  struggle  and  privation,  through  the  trials 
of  the  Eevolution,  the  clergy  are  associated  not  only 
with  the  piety  and  the  learning,  but  with  the  liberties 
of  the  country.  New  Ei^land  for  a  loi^  time  was  gov- 
erned by  their  prayers  more  than  by  any  acts  of  the 
Legislature ;  and  at  a  later  day  their  voices  aided  even 
the  Declaration  of  Independence.     The  clei^  of  our 


■cibyGoogIc 


IN   NEBRASKA  AUD  KANSAS.  S41 

time  speak,  then,  not  only  from  their  own  viitaes,  hut 
from  echoes  yet  surviving  in  the  pulpits  of  their  fatliers. 

For  myself,  I  desire  to  thank  them  for  their  generous 
interposition.  Abeady  they  have  done  much  good  in 
moving  the  country.  They  will  not  he  idle.  In  the 
days  of  the  Revolution,  John  Adams,  yearning  for  Inde- 
pendence, said,  "  Let  the  pnlpita  thunder  against  oppres- 
sion!" And  the  pulpits  thundered.'  The  time  has  come 
for  them  to  thunder  again.  So  famous  was  John  Knox 
for  power  in  prayer,  that  Queen  Mary  used  to  say  she 
feared  his  prayers  more  than  all  the  armies  of  Europe. 
But  our  cleigy  have  prayers  to  be  feared  by  the  uphold- 
ers of  wi'ong. 

There  are  lessons  taught  by  these  remonstrances, 
which,  at  this  moment,  should  not  pass  unheeded.  The 
Senator  from  Ohio  [Mr.  Wade],  on  the  other  side  of 
the  chamber,  has  openly  declared  that  Northern  "Whigs 
can  never  £^in  combine  with  their  Southern  brethren 
in  support  of  Slavery.  This  is  a  good  augury.  The 
clergy  of  New  England,  some  of  whom,  fo^tful  of  the 
traditions  of  other  days,  once  made  their  pulpits  vocal 
for  the  Fugitive  Slave  BUI,  now,  by  the  voices  of  learned 
divines,  eminent  bishops,  accomplished  professors,  and 
faithful  pastors,  uttered  in  solemn  remonstrance,  unite 
at  last  ill  putting  a  permanent  brand  upon  this  hate- 
ful wrong.  Surely,  from  this  time  forward,  they  can 
never  more  render  it  any  support.  Thank  God  for  this  J 
Here  is  a  sign  full  of  promise  for  Freedom. 

These  remonstrances  have  especial  significance,  when 

'  A  specimen  is  iiii  address  by  Bev,  Thomns  Allen,  Minister  of  Pittafielil, 
Mass.,  entitled  "Instruction  and  Counsel  of  a  Country  Clei^yninn,  given  to 
his  People,  Lord's  Day,  June  SO,  ITT9,  immedintely  after  reading  [to  them] 
the  AddreKs  of  the  Honorable  Congress  to  the  Inhabitants  of  tliese  United 
States."    See  Boston  Independent  Chronicle,  July  15,  .1779. 


■cibyGoogIc 


342  FINAL  PEOTEST  AGAINST  SLAVERY 

it  is  ui^ed,  as  has  been  often  done  iu  this  debate,  tliat 
the  proposition  stiU  pending  proceeds  from  the  North. 
Yes,  Sir,  proceeds  from  the  North :  for  that  is  its  excuse 
and  apolc^.  The  ostrich  is  reputed  to  hide  its  head  in 
the  sand,  and  then  vainly  imagine  its  coward  body  be- 
yond the  I'each  of  pursuers.  In  similar  spirit,  honor- 
able Senators  seem  to  shelter  themselves  behind  scanty 
Northern  votes,  and  then  vainly  imagine  that  they  ai'e 
protected  from  the  judgment  of  the  country.  The  pul- 
pits of  New  England,  representing  in  unprecedented 
extent  the  popular  voice  there,  now  proclaim  that  six 
States,  with  all  the  fervor  of  religious  conviction,  protest 
against  your  outrage.  To  this  extent,  at  least,  I  main- 
tain it  does  not  come  from  the  North. 

From  these  expressions,  and  other  tokens  which  daily 
greet  us,  it  is  evident  that  at  last  the  religious  sentiment 
of  the  country  is  touched,  and,  Uirov^h  this  sentiment,  I 
rejoice  to  believe  that  the  whole  North  will  be  quickened 
with  the  true  life  of  Freedom.  Su:  Philip  Sidney,  speak- 
ing to  Queen  Elizabeth  of  the  spirit  in  the  Netherlands, 
animating  every  man,  woman,  and  child  against  the 
Spanish  power,  exclaimed,  "It  is  the  spvdt  of  the  Lord, 
and  is  irresistible."  A  kindred  spirit  now  animates  the 
Free  States  against  the  Slave  Power,  breathing  every- 
where its  involuntary  inspiration,  and  forbidding  repose 
under  the  attempted  usurpation.  It  is  the  spirit  of  the 
Lord,  and  is  irresistible.  The  threat  of  di  sunion,  too  often 
sounded  in  our  ears,  wiU  be  disregarded  by  au  aroused 
.and  ind%nant  people.  Ah,  Sir,  Senators  vainly  expect 
peace.  Not  in  this  way  can  peace  come.  In  passing  such 
a  bill  as  is  now  threatened,  you  scatter,  from  this  dark 
midnight  hour,  no  seeds  of  harmony  and  good-will,  but, 
broadcast  throi^h  the  land,  dragons'  teeth,  which  haply 


■cibyGoogIc 


IN   KEBEASKA  AND   KANSAS.  313 

may  not  spring  up  in  direful  crops  of  armed  men,  yet, 
I  am  assured.  Sir,  will  fructify  in  civil  strife  and  feud. 

l^om  the  deptlis  of  my  soul,  as  loyal  citizen  and  as 
Senator,  I  plead,  remonstrate,  protest,  against  the  pas- 
sage of  this  bilL  I  strv^gle  against  it  as  ^inst  death ; 
but,  as  in  death  itself  corruption  puts  on  incorruption, 
and  this  mortal  body  puts  on  immortality,  so  from  the 
sting  of  this  hour  I  iind  assurance  of  that  triumph  by 
which  Freedom  will  be  restored  to  her  immortal  birth- 
right in  the  Eepublic. 

i%T,  the  hill  you  are  about  to  pass  is  at  once  the  worst 
and  the  best  on  which  Congress  &ver  acted.  Yes,  Sir,  worst 
and  BEST  at  the  same  time. 

It  is  the  worst  biU,  inasmuch  as  it  is  a  present  .victory 
of  Slavery.  In  a  Christian  land,  and  in  an  age  of  civ- 
ilization, a  time-honored  statute  of  Fi'eedom  is  struck 
down,  opening  the  way  to  all  the  countless  woes  and 
wrongs  of  human  bondage.  Among  the  crimes  of  history, 
another  is  soon  to  be  recorded,  which  no  tears  can  blot 
out,  and  which  in  better  days  wiU  be  read  with  universal 
shame.  Do  not  start.  The  Tea  Tax  and  Stamp  Act, 
which  aroused  the  patriot  r^e  of  our  fathers,  were  vir- 
tues by  the  side  of  your  transgression ;  nor  would  it  be 
easy  to  imagine,  at  this  day,  any  measure  which  more 
openly  and  wantonly  defied  every  sentiment  of  justice, 
humanity,  and  Christianity.  Am  I  not  right,  then,  in 
calling  it  the  worst  biU  on  which  Congress  ever  acted  ? 

There  is  another  side,  to  wliich  I  gladly  turn.  Sir,  it 
is  the  best  bill  on  which  Congress  ever  acted;  /or  it  an- 
nuls all  past  comprorrmes  with  Slavery,  and  makes  any 
future  compromises  impossible.  Thus  it  puts  Freedom 
and  Slavery  face  to  face,  and  bids  them  grapple.  Who 
can  doubt  the  result  ?     It  opens  wide  the  door  of  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


344  FINAL  PROTEST  AGAINST   SLAVERY 

Future,  when,  at  last,  there  will  really  he  a  North,  aiid 
the  Slave  Power  ■will  he  broten,  — when  this  wretched 
Despotism  will  cease  to  dominate  over  our  Government, 
no  longer  impressing  itseU'  upon  everything'  at  home 
and  abroad,  —  when  the  National  Government  will  he 
divorced  in  eveiy  way  from  Slavery,  and,  according  to 
tlie  tme  intention  of  our  fathers,  Preedom  will  he  es- 
tablished by  Congress  everywhere,  at.  least  beyond  the 
local  limits  of' the  States. 

Slavery  will  then  be  driven  from  usurped  foothold 
here  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  in  the  National  Terri- 
tories, and  elsewhere  beneath  the  national  flag;  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  as  vUe.  as  it  is  unconstitutional,  will 
become  a  dead  letter ;  and  the  domestic  Slave-Trade,  so 
far  as  it  can  be  reached,  hut  especially  on  the  high  seas, 
will  be  blasted  by  Congressional  Prohibition.  Every- 
where within  the  sphere  of  Congress,  the  great  Northern 
ffammer  will  descend  to  smite  the  wrong ;  and  the 
irresistible  cry  will  break  forth,  "  No  more  Slave 
States!" 

Thus,  Sir,  standing  at  the  very  grave  of  Freedom  in 
Nebraska  and  Kansas,  I  lift  myself  to  the  vision  of  that 
happy  resurrection  by  which  Freedom  will  be  assured, 
not  only  in  these  Territories,  but  everywhere  under  the 
National  Government.  More  clearly  than  ever  before, 
I  now  penetrate  that  great  Future  when  Slavery  must 
disappear.  Proudly  I  discern  the  flag  of  my  comitry, 
as  it  ripples  in  eveiy  breeze,  at  last  in  reality,  as  in 
name,  the  Flag  of  Freedom,  —  undoubted,  pm-e,  and 
irresistible.  Am  I  not  right,  then,  in  calling  this  hiU 
ttie  best  on  which  Congress  ever  acted  ? 

Sorrowfully  I  bend  before  the  wrong  you  commit. 
Joyfully  I  welcome  the  promises  of  the  Future. 


■cibyGoogIc 


IN   KEBSASKA  AND    KANSAS.  345 

"Wlien  Mr.  SumnBr  took  his  seat,  he  was  sncceeded  by  Mr.  Mason,  of 
Virginia,  who  spoke  as  Ibllowa, 

I  understand  that  tho  petitions  which  the  Senator  [Mr. 
Sumner]  who  has  just  taken  hia  seat  offers  were  to  be  ad- 
mitted, aa  they  were  ofiered,  by  the  unanimous  consent  of 
the  Senate.  Two  of  them,  when  offered,  were  seiit  to  the 
President's  table.  The  last  he  has  reserved,  and  made  the 
vehicle  for  communicating  the  sentiments  of  the  pnlpita  of 
New  England  to  the  Senate,  on  the  subject  of  this  bill.  I 
object  to  its  reception;  and  I  object  to  it  because  I  under- 
stand that  Senator  to  say  that  it  is  verbatim,  the  petition 
that  was  presented  by  his  honorable  colleagite,  who  is  not 
now  with  us,  in  which  the  clergy  presented  themselves  in 
this  Senate  and  to  the  country  as  a  third,  estate,  speaking 
not  as  American  citizens,  but  as  clergymen,  and  in  that 
character  only.  I  object  to  its  reception.  I  object  to  it, 
that  I  may  not  in  any  manner  minister  to  the  unchristian 
purposes  of  the  clergy  of  New  England,  aa  the  Senator  has 
just  announced  them.  I  object  to  it,  that  I  may  be  in  no 
manner  responsible  for  the  prostitution  of  their  office  {once 
called  holy  and  sacred,  with  them  no  longer  so)  in  the  fe«e 
of  the  Senate  and  of  the  American  people.  I  object  to  it, 
that  the  cler^-men  of  my  own  honored  State,  and  of  the 
South,  may,  as  holding  a  common  office  in  the  ministry  of 
the  Gospel,  be  in  no  manner  confounded  with  or  contaminated 
by  these  clergymen  -of  New  England,  if  the  Senator  repre- 
sents them  correctly. 

Sir,  if  the  Senator  has  represented  these  clergymen  cor- 
rectly, I  rejoice  that  there  is  to  be  a  separation  between  the 
Church  North  and  the  Church  South ;  for,  I  say,  if  these 
men  dare  to  lay  aside  the  character  of  American  citizens, 
and  come  here  profaning  their  office,  profaning  the  name  of 
the  Almighty,  for  the  purpose  of  political  alliances,  they  are 
imworthy  of  their  associates  in  the  Church.  Sir,  it  is  the 
first  time  in  the  history  of  this  countiy  that  a  Church  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


346  i'lSAL  PEOTEST  AGAINST   SLAVEEr 

any  denomination  has  asserted  a  riglit  to  be  heard,  as  a 
Church,  upon  the  floors  of  legislation ;  and  if  the  Senator 
represents  that  body  correctly,  they  have  profaned  their 
office,  and  I  predict  now  a  total  separation  between  the 
Church  North  and  the  Church  South,  if  I  understand  the 
sentiments  of  the  Church  South.  The  Church  there,  I  know, 
is  yet  pure  in  its  great  and  holy  misaion.  When  its  minis- 
ters address  themselves  from  the  p\ilpit,  they  are  heard  with 
respect,  under  the  sanctity  of  their  office.  You  find  none  of 
them  coming  here  to  the  doors  of  legislation  to  mingle  in 
political  strife.  They  truly  hold  themselves  "unspotted 
from  the  world." 

If  the  Senator  who  has  just  taken  his  seat  has  correctly 
expounded  the  clergymen  of  New  England,  I  object  to  that 
petition,  If  he  has  correctly  stated  that  it  is  verbatim 
copied  from  the  petition  presented  hy  his  colleague,  I  say  it 
is  a  prostitution  of  their  office  to  the  embrace  of  jiolitical 
party  ;  and  the  Senate  shall  not,  by  my  assent,  be  made  the 
medium  of  so  unholy  an  alliance.  I  do  not  mean  to  go  fur- 
ther into  this  debate  ;  hut  I  object  to  the  reception  of  the 
petition. 

The  Presiding  OrriCBR.  The  petitions  cannot  be  received 
without  unanimous  consent. 


Me,  Sumnee.  It  may  be,  Sir,  at  this  miiment,  within 
the  competency  of  the  honorable  Senator  from  Viiginia 
to  object  to  the  reception  of  these  remonstrances ;  bnt  I 
am  satisfied  that  at  another  time  his  cahner  judgment 
will  not  approve  this  course,  much  less  the  ground  on 
which  now,  as  well  as  on  a  former  occasion,  he  has  un- 
dertaken .to  impeach  the"  right  of  clergymen  to  appear 
by  petition  or  remonstrance  at  the  bar  of  Congress.  Sir, 
in  refusing  to  receive  these  remonstrances,  or  in  neg- 
lecting them  in  any  way,  on  reasons  ass^ed  in  this 


■cibyGoogIc 


IN  NEBRASKA  AlTD   KANSAS.  347 

chamber,  you  treat  them  with  an  ind^ity  which  be- 
comes more  marked,  becaiise  it  is  the  constant  habit  of 
the  Senate  to  welcome  remonstrances  from  members  of 
the  Society  of  Friends  in  their  religious  character,  and 
from  all  other  persons,  hy  any  designation  which  they 
may  adopt.  Booksellers  remonstrate  against  the  interna- 
tional copyright  treaty ;  last-makers  against  a  proposed 
change  in  the  patent  laws  ;  and  only  lately  tlie  tobacco- 
nists have  remonstrated  against  certain  regulations  touch- 
ing tobacco :  and  all  these  remonstrances  are  received' 
with  respect,  and  referred  to  appropriate  committees  in 
the  Senate.  But  the  clergy  of  New  England,  when  pro- 
testing gainst  a  wicked  measure,  which,  with  singular 
unanimity,  they  believe  full  of  peril  and  shame  to  our 
country,  are  told  to  stay  at  home.  Almost  the  jeer  is 
heard,  "  Go  up,  thou  bald  head ! "  If  not  well,  it  is  at 
least  natural,  that  the  act  you  are  about  to  commit  should 
be  attended  by  this  concordant  outrage. 


.  From  the  Kansas  and  Febmeka  Bill  came  forth  a  demon.  Down,  to 
this  time  the  hostility  to  Mr.  Sumner  in  the  Senate  was  limited.  It 
now  became  more  general,  although  he  had  said  nothing  in  any  way  to 
justify  it,  except  that  he  had  exposed  Slavery  and  tha  pretensions  in 
jts  behalf  From  the  Senate  it  extended  among  the  partisans  of  Slav- 
.ery. 

Meanwhile  an  incident  in  Boston  was  used  to  aroi 
him.  On  the  evemng  of  the  24th  of  May  Anthony  Bums  w 
there  as  a  fugitive  slave,  on  the  claim  of  a  citizen  of  Virginia,  and  de- 
tained by  the  marshal  in  a  room  of  the  Court-House.  In  the  course  of 
the  evening  of  the  26th,  immediately  after  a  meeting  at  Faneuil  Hall, 
addressed  by  Abolitionisla,  the  Court-House  was  attacked  hy  a  number 
of  citizens,  and  in  the  defence,  James  Batchelder,  one  of  the  guard,  was 
killed.  The  report  of  his  deatii  caused  a  great  sensation  at  Washington. 
It  was  leceived  while  the  impression  of  Mr.  Sumner's  midnight  speech 
'was  still  fresh,  and  was  at  onee  attributed  to  that  effort.  Mr.  Sumner 
was  treated  as  responsible  for  this  act,  and  the  official  organs  of  the  Ad- 


;db,Googlc 


FINAL  PROTEST  AGAINST  SLAYEEY 

a  o])enly  denounced  him  is  "murderer."  It  was  predicted 
in  the  speech  that  the  bill  would  "  scatter  drajjons'  teeth,"  which  he  was, 
assured  would  "fructify  in  civil  strife  aud  feud";  hut  plainly  there 
was  nothing  to  suggest  or  excite  Tiolence,  even  if  at  the  time  the  speech 
had  heen  known  in  Boston,  as  it  was  not.  It  was  concluded  on  the 
morning  of  the  26th  of  May,  at  too  late  an  hour  for  the  telegi'aph,  and 
in  feet  was  not  known  in  Boston  untO  It  Kachcd  there  hy  mail  on  the 
37th  i  but  Batcheldet  was  killed  on  the  previous  evening.  And  yet, 
in  the  face  of  these  unquestionable  facts,  there  was  a  cry  against  Mr. 
Sumner. 

The  Union,  which  was  the  official  organ,  thus  broke  forth  on  tlie 
morning  of  May  30th. 

"  Boston  in  arms  agf^st  the  Constitution,  and  an  Abolition  fanatic,  the 
distant  leader,  safe  fi-om  the  fire  and  the  fagot  he  hivokes  from  his  seat  in 
the  Senate  of  the  Unitad  States,  jiimip  the  conanand.  Men  shot  down  in 
the  faithful  discharge  of  duty  to  a  law  based  apoo  a  constitntiotial  guaranty, 
and  ifte  word  iMch  eatxiurafti  the  atarasm  given  by  a  man  who  has  sworn  on 
the  Holy  Evangelists  and  hi  the  presence  of  his  Maker  to  support  the  ConsU- 
tntlon  of  the  ooniitry.  But  onr  Charles  Sumner  tells  na  that  a  new  era  has 
been  Inangurated, , . . .  that  the  Constitution  shall  not  be  obeyed,  and  that 
Slavery  shall  at  all  and  every  hazard  be  uprooted  and  destroyed,  in  spite 
of  all  that  has  been  pledged  and  written  in  other  days." 

The  Star,  another  organ  of  the  Administration,  repeated  the  imputa- 
tions of  the  Union,  in  a  long  urticle,  of  which  the  following  is  a  speci- 

"  If  Sonthem  gentlemen  sre  threatened  and  assaulted,  whRe  Iflgally  seek- 
ing to  obtahi  possession  of  property  fbr  the  use  of  which  thay  have  a  solemn 
constitntionttl  guaranty,  if  legal  rights  can  only  he  sought  for  and  sstah- 
llshed  at  the  bayonet's  point,  eeWnin  Iforthera  men  hdjo  in  oar  midst  will 
have  to  evince  a  litUe  mora  oiroumBpection  than  they  have  ever  evinced  hi 
their  walk,  talk,  and  acts. 

"  Public  sentiment  in  Alexandria  is  intensely  excited  in  condemnation  of 
Sumner  and  his  allies.  Wa  know  that  it  increases  in  this  citj  every  hour. 
The  masses  look  upon  Snmner  as  responsible  for  the  death  of  Batchelder. 
Thay  attribute,  and  justly,  the  action  of  flie  murderers  to  the  counsel  of 
Snmner.  We  hope  that  the  pnblio  sentiment  against  these  Abolition  mis- 
creants who  infest  Congress  and  onr  Ihir  city,  and  fill  the  atmosphere  in 
which  they  move  with  the  odor  of  a  brothel,  will  not  descend  to  acts  of  peiv 
eonnl  violence.  Such  conduct  can  find  no  justification.  But  let  public  opin- 
ion condemn  these  man  everywhere,  —  In  the  street,  hi  the  Capitol,  in  every 
place  where  men  meet.  Lei  Bumner  md  hh  mfitmani  gang  feel  tiiat  he  can- 
not outrage  the  f^me  of  his  country,  counsel  treason  to  its  laws,  incite  the 
ignorsnt  to  bloodshed  and  murder,  and  still  receive  the  support  and  counte- 
nance of  the  society  of  this  city,  which  he  has  done  so  much  to  vilify. 


■cibyGoogIc 


IN  KEBEASKA  AND   KANSAS.  349 

"  While  the  pevsoii  of  a  Virginia  citizen  is  only  safe  from  rudenesa  and 
oatrage  beliind  the  serried  ranks  of  arm  ed  man,  Charles  Sumner  is  permitted 
to  walk  among  the  '  slave-catehers '  and  '  fire-eaters  '  of  the  South  in  peace 
and  security.  While  he  incites  his  oonBtitnents  to  resist  the  Federal  laws  even 
la  IhtsheMng  of  blood,  aonconts  Us  baitortms  plots,  and  sends  forth  his  in- 
cendiary appeals  under  the  broad  protecting  panoply  of  the  laws  he  de- 
nounces, he  retains  his  seat  in  the  Senate,  and  yet  daily  violates  the  official 
oath  which  he  took  to  support  tha  Consdtadon  of  the  United  States." 

Such  articles  were  plainly  intended  to  excite  a  mOlj  against  Mr.  Sum- 
ner. The  conspiracy  obtained  headway  in  Alexandria.  One  propo- 
sition was,  to  seize  him  as  hostage  for  the  suriender  of  the  fugitive 
slave  whose  case  was  then  pending  in  Boston  ;  another  was,  to  in- 
flict upon  him  personal  indignity  and  violence ;  another  was,  "to  put 
a  ball  through  his  head."  These  menaces  were  communicated  to  Mm, 
and  he  was  warned  to  leave  Washington.  This  he  refused  to  do,  aaid 
he  insisted  ni)on  walking  to  the  Senate  by  Pennsylvania  Avetiue,  always 
nnarmed.  At  a  restaurant,  where  he  dined,  he  was  directly  -nienaeecl 
and  insulted.  The  following  telegram  in  the  New  York  Tifiies,  nnder 
date  of  May  31,  states  the  case  briefly. 

"  A  atrenuoua  and  systematiMd  effort  Is  making  here  and  in  Alesandrla 
to  raise  a  mob  against  Senator  Sntnnar,  in  retaliation  for  the  Boston  dif- 
ficulty  The  Bforof  this  evening  has  two  articles,  the  incendiary  pur- 
pose of  which  cannot  be  mistaken.  Senator  Srnnner  himself  has  been  sev- 
eral times  warned  to-dny  of  personal  danger,  and  assured  that  persons  beap- 
tng  close  relaUon  to  the  Administration  are  inciting  the  people  to  violence 
agfunst  him.  Northern  men  are  much  excited  in  consequence,  and  if  an 
outrage  Is  committed,  there  is  a  probability  that  there  will  be  seiious 
trouble." 

The  some  telegram  was  sent  to  other  places.  Throughout  New 
England  it  excited  great  sensation,  attested  at  once  by  the  public  press 
and  by  private  letters.  The  following  was  received  by  Mr.  Sranner, 
under  date  of  May  31,  from  Joseph  E.  Hawley,  of  Coiniecticut,  flfter- 
waivds  a  general  in  the  War,  and  Governor  of  Connecticut. 

"  If  you  really  think  there  is  any  danger  worth  mentioning,  I  wish  you 
would  telegraph  me  instantly.  I  will  come  to  Washington  by  the  next  train, 
and  quietly  tiny  by.  I  have  revolvers,  and  can  use  them,  —  and  while  there 
should  not  be  a  word  of  unnecessary  provocation,  still,  if  anybody  in  Alex- 
andria or  Washington  really  means  to  trouble  you,  or  any  other  Free  Demo- 
crat there,  yon  know  several  can  play  at  that  game.  I  feel  comparatively 
little  anxiety  as  to  the  result  In  Boston.  Let  them  hunt  slaves  till  the  peo- 
ple get  sick  of  it.  But  such  threats  as  are  conveyed  hy  that  despatch  should 
he  qaielJy  prepared  for,  and  met  as  they  deserve." 


■cibyGoogIc 


350  FINAL    PROTEST   AGA1^^ST    SLAVERT 

Geoi^  Livermore,  of  Boston,  gave  eupreasion  to  tlie  same  anxiely  in 
a  difl'eraiit  fonn.     He  wrote  thus,  under  date  of  Jirne  S. 

"  Tliere  is  but  one  tfeeling  here  respecting  tlie  infamous  threats  of  tbe 
Mom  and  Star.  Let  Ote  BiinioM  of  the  Admisiitrotion  and  of  the  Siawcracs 
harm  one  hair  of  your  head,  and  they  mill  raiie  a  MrMad  that  viiU  me^  Ihem 
to  deitructim.  I  have  read  your  closing  remarka  on  the  Nebraska  Bill  with 
the  greatest  admiration,  and  raoat  heartily  indorse  every  word  and  senti- 
ment. Ton  never  made  a  better  speaoh.  What  higher  praise  could  I  offer? 
Many  persona  not  of  the  Free-Soil  party  have  spoken  of  it  in  terms  of  tlie 
highest  commendation."      ■ 

Tlie  violence  was  postponed ;  but  the  insJignant  spirit  continued 

Beyond  the  sentiment  of  indignation  at  the  menaces  to  which  Mr. 
Sumner  ivae  exposed  arose  another  against  Slavery.  Persona  who  liad 
been  cold  or  Ivikewarm  before  were  excited  now.  Here  again  contem- 
porary newspapers  and  private  lettera  testify.  John  B.  Alley,  for  sev- 
eral years  afterwards  the  representative  from  Essex,  wrote  thus,  under 
date  of  June  5. 

"  The  most  eventfiil  week  that  Boston  has  ever  seen  baa  jnat  passed,  and 
I  cannot  refrain  from  troubling  yon  with  a  description  of  the  state  of  feeling 
here-  In  the  iirst  place,  allow  me  to  congratulate  you  apon  the  glorious 
position  you  oooupy  in  the  hearts  of  the  people  of  Boston.  Praises  from  the 
iipa  of  the  most  nltra  Hunker  Whigs  have  greeted  my  ears  (I  need  not  tell 
yon  ATith  how  much  plenanra)  during  the  past  weak. 

"  Ekiston,  it  is  true,  has  been  humbled  in  the  dust,  and  it  is  hard,  terribly 
hard,  to  be  compelled  to  witness  the  surrender  of  a  panting  fugitive  Into  tlie 
hands  of  the  Slave-Hunters;  but  never,  since  I  have  been  engaged  in  the 
Autislayery  cause,  have  I  seen  occasion  for  r^oloing  as  now. 

"  Thank  God,  the  chains  that  have  bound  the  people  to  their  old  organi- 
zations have  been  snapped  asunder,  and  they  have  proved  in  this  case  but  as 

paokthrends  npoii  the  arms  of  an  nnshom  Samson Tonr  speech 

in  defence  of  the  clergy  is  noble,  and  wonderfully  effective,  apparently,  in 
sthring  up  tbek  sympathies  for  the  slave." 

Numerous  letters  describe  the  snrrender  to  which  Mr.  Alley  alludes. 
The  following  ftom  K.  H.  Dana,  Jr.,  under  date  of  June  6,  gives 
details. 

"  Judging  fimn  present  appearances,  there  are  few  Compromise  men  left 
in  Boston.  I  firmly  believe  that  in  the  pi^ovidenoe  of  God  it  has  been  de- 
creed that  one  cup  more  should  be  put  to  our  lips,  and  that  it  should  not 
pass  away  until  we  had  drahied  it  to  the  dregs.  To  this  end,  a  folly  has 
bean  put  In  their  counsel  and  a  raadoess  in  their  hearts,  that  they  mi^ht  do 
the  things  that  should  work  in  the  end  the  utmost  good.  The  delnvs,  the 
doubts  as  to  the  propriety  of  the  decision  [nioie  than  doubts  oven  with  the 


;db,Googlc 


IN  HEBRA.SKA  AND  KANSAS.  351 

moderate],  the  military  indignities  and  violefce,  the  noontlayprooesaion,  the 
refusal  to  seli,  the  i'residenlial  Intervention,  all  have  tended  to  tlie  desired 
effect.  Poor  Bums  himself  looked  with  terror  to  a  renewal  of  slavery, 
Not  that  Colonel  Suttia  waA  cruel.  He  has  uever  lived  with  Suttle,  but  he 
is  intelligent,  reads  and  writes,  is  weak  in  hia  iigured  head,  and  therefore 
of  little  value,  aiid  liable  to  be  sold  and  abused. 

"  Batcholder  was  not  a  daputj-marshal.  He  is  only  a  man  who  has  vol- 
unteered, this  third  time,  against  advice,  to  help  catch  and  keep  a  fugitive 
slave.  You  observe  the  marshiil  only  calls  him  one  of  his  '  guards.'  Thi( 
guacd  were  a  pracions  set  of  murderers,  thieves,  bullies,  blacklegs,  —  vpitt 
a  very  few  men  who  went  into  it  from  party  bias,  old  Hunker  Deiuocratic 
traolsmen.  Batchelder  was  a  truokioan,  1  am  told,  and  may  be  personallj 
respectable  for  aught  I  know.  I  cau  give  you  no  advice  as  to  the  pension 
They  ought  to  know  what  Batchelder  was.  It  seems  to  me  uuconsMtU' 
tional  and  unprecedented.  If  it  can  be  defeated  without  your  stir,  it  woufi 
be  better,  no  doubt.  I  do  not  And  there  is  any  feeling  for  his  case  hera 
He  volunteered  for  the  duty,  and  met  the  consequences.  He  voluntarilj 
risked  bis  life  for  pay,  in  on  odious  and  daugerous  business,  and  lost  it." 

George  Livermore,  always  a  decided  Whig,  who  had  written  unde' 
dale  of  June  3,  wrote  again,  nnder  date  of  June  18 ;  — 

"  I  am,  as  I  always  have  been,  a  Conservative  Whig,  but  I  am  ready  to 
fraternize  with  aitj/iodsv^owillilo  Uiemoafar  Freedont;  and  if  one  who  has 
heretofore  been  called  a  Democrat  or  a  Free-Soiler  will  do  more  for  this 
cause  than  a  candidate  who  has  been  called  a  Whig,  he  shall  have  my  vole, 
and  my  hearty  coBporaHon  in  every  way  in  my  power." 

A  merchant  of  Boston  wrote  at  the  same  time  :  — 

"I  rejoice  that  a  man  of  yonr  sympathies  and  sensibilities  is  not  here  to 
see  the  Court-Honse  again  in  chains,  and  justice  administered  behind  bayo- 
nets. The  only  retaliation  at  present  proposed  is  a  peHtion  to  repeal  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Act,  now  in  the  News-Itoom,  on  its  second  day,  with  several 
thousand  names  attached.  But  what  is  the  ase  of  petition,  or  polished  sen- 
tences and  ronnded  periods,  in  a  contest  with  the  pirate  honor  of  Slavery  7 
It  is  like  an  attempt  to  hew  down  a  mountain  of  granite  with  a  glass  pick- 

The  sentitnBnts  of  tlie  people,  and  partiwilarly  of  tlie  clergy,  are 
sketched  by  Rev.  George  C.  Beckwith,  Sesretary  of  the  Peace  Society, 
in  a  latter  dated  June  2,  from  which  an  extract  is  given. 

"Yon  will  have  learned  ere  this  that  the  deed  is  done.— the  deed  of  shame 
and  degradation  to  our  good  old  State.  I  witnessed  the  scene  from  an  in- 
surance olBce  on  State  Street,  and  never  before  felt  such  a  sense  of  degra- 
dation. I  am  glad  that  so  many  seemed  to  share  it  with  me:  fori  observed 
H  sort  of  funereal  sadness  on  the  vast  masses  beforeflnd  around  me.  There 
were  groans  and  hisses  at  even  Our  own  troops,  the  militia,  that  had  come 


;db,Googlc 


352  FINAL    PROTEST   AGAINST   SLAVERY. 

out  at  the  call  of  our  mayor ;  but  every  effiirt  to  get  up  any  counter  ap- 
plause proved  a  fiiluro. 

"  I  took  my  pen,  liowever,  for  another  purpose,  us  you  will  get  from  othei 
sources  a  better  account  of  this  day's  public  proeeedinge.  I  wish  to  say  a. 
word  about  our  clericni  friends,  whom  yon  have  vindicated  with  60  much 
spirit  and  force  lu  your  brief  speech  before  the  Senate.  They  met  yes- 
terday mumiiig,  almost  without  notice,  ia  the  nrnnber  of  some  four  or 
five  hundred,  for  conenitntion  on  this  subject.  I  never  attended  a  meeting 
tliat  evinoad  e.  truer  spirit  or  a  greHter  amount  of  moral  power.  Little  or 
no  efFervesoenca  on  the  surface,  but  a  depth  of  feeling,  a  calmness  of  con- 
viction, and  an  eneigy  of  purpose,  from  which,  I  am  well  satiafled,  the 
whole  country  will  hear  in  due  time. 

"  I  think  I  am  atjil  true  to  my  peace  principles,  but  my  heart  is  stirred  to 
its  lowest  depths  of  indignation;  and  I  y  fi  nb  y  mo  who  applaud 
what  our  forefathers  did,  that  toe  have  now       n  si  oi  5  ona  for  rasist- 

ance  to  the  Slave  Powei-  than  they  bad  to        u     pa    n       England." 

Thomas  Sherwin,  kte  head-master  of  h  Bo  H  gh  School,  and 
once  a  tutflr  of  Mr.  Sumner  at  HaiTard  Un  y  wio    as  follows, 

"Yon,  Sir,  in  my  opinion,  command  th  h  g  re  p  from  the  people, 
not  only  of  Massachusetts,  hut  of  the  e  U      n      T         urself,  Chase, 

Gidduigs,  Smith,  Benton,  and  a  few  others,  (he  great  miyority  of  our  peo- 
ple looli  for  protection  against  the  maohinations  of  politioians  who  would 
bring  upon  our  coHntry  the  contempt  of  tlie  civilized  world,  and  upon  Ihe 
Government  the  execration  of  unborn  millions." 

These  extracts  prepare  the  way  for  the  next  scene  in  the  di-ama. 


■cibyGoogIc 


UBION  OF  ALL  PAETLE8  NICESSAET  AGAINST  THB 
SLAYE  POWER. 

Letter  to  a  MASSAcnuaiiTTS  Committee,  May  29,  185'1. 


Senate  Ceambee,  May  29,  1854. 

GENTLEMEN",  — For  the  present  my  post  of  duty  is 
here,  3o  that  I  must  forego  the  pleasure  of  meeting 
our  friends  on  Wednesday  next.  The  Massachusetts  host, 
I  am  glad  to  learn,  will  be  reinforced  on  that  occasion  by 
brave  voices  from  other  States.  Mr.  Giddings  you  wiU 
be  glad  to  welcome. 

Could  I  meet  my  fello-w-eitizens,  I  should  not  lose  the 
opportimity  of  sounding  the  alarm  and  exhorting  them 
to  action.  The  Nebraska  Bill  has  passed,  but  it  is  a  mis- 
take to  suppose  that  the  props^andists  of  Slavery  will 
stop  here.  Other  audacities  are  at  hand.  More  land 
from  Mexico  is  sought,  on  which  to  extend  a  nefarious 
institution.  The  calamities  of  war  with  Spain,  incalcu- 
lably disastrous  to  the  commerce  of  New  York  and  Eos- 
ton,  are  all  to  be  braved  in  order  to  appropriate  slave- 
holding  Cuba.  An  intrigue  is  now  pendii^  to  secure  a 
foothold  in  Hayti ;  and  even  the  distant  valley  of  the 
Amazon  is  embraced  in  these  g^antic  sehemes,  by  which 
the  despotism  of  the  Slave  Power  is  to  be  established, 
while  you  and  I,  and  all  of  us  from  the  North,  are  to 
bow  down  before  it.  For  myself,  I  will  not  bow  down  ; 
but.  Gentlemen,  you  will  understand  that  no  individual 
can  effectually  oppose  these  sehemes. 


■cibyGoogIc 


354      UNION  OF  PAETIES  AGAISST  THE  SLAVE  POWER. 

This  can  be  done  only  in  one  way.  As  all  at  tlie 
South,  without  distinction  of  party,  unite  for  Slavery, 
so  all  at  the  North,  without  distinction  of  party,  forget- 
ting vain  differences  of  Whig  and' Democrat,  must  unite 
for  Treedom,  and,  rising  in  majority  and  miglit,  take 
control  of  the  National  Government,  For  this  work 
the  people  are  now  ready ;  and  they  can  surely  accom- 
plish it,  if  they  will.  The  only  impediment,  at  this  mo- 
ment, is  to  he  fomid  in  those  blind  or  selfish  politicians 
who  perversely  seek  a  triumph  of  mere  party,  instead  of 
a  triumph  of  Freedom.  Neither  the  "Whig  party  nor  the 
Democratic  party,  through  its  national  organization  de- 
pendent on  slaveholding  wings,  is  competent  to  the  exi- 
gency. The  slaveholding  wings  can  he  kept  in  concert 
with  the  Northern  wings  only  when  they  give  the  law  to 
the  movement.  For  a  poor  triumph  of  party,  the  North 
yields,  in  advance,  all  that  b  dear  to  it,  and,  while  vainly 
caUing  itself  national,  helps  to  instal  the  sectional  power 
of  Slavery  in  the  National  Government.  This  must  be 
changed. 

With  an  earnest  soul,  devoted  to  the  triumph  of  the 
righteous  cause,  and  indifferent  to  the  name  by  which  I 
may  be  called,  I  would  say  to  all  at  this  time.  Abandon 
old  party  ties ;  foiget  old  party  names ;  let  by-gones  be 
by-gones ;  and  for  the  sake  of  Liberty,  and  to  secure 
the  general  welfare,  now  unite  against  the  Despotism 
of  Slavery,  and  in  this  union  let  past  differences  disap- 
pear. 

Believe  me,  Gentlemen, 

Very  faithfully  yours, 

Charles  Sumnee. 
Hon,  P  "W  Bird,  James  M,  Stone,  Committee. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  BOSTON  PETITION  WK  THE  EEPEAL  OE  THE 
EDGITIYE  SLAVE  ACT. 


jENATE,  ON   THE    BoSTON    PETITION  FOB   THE  RePEAL 

!  FiToinvE  Si^TB  Act,  June  26,  1854. 


The  midiiiglit  speech  of  Mr.  Sumner  on  the  Kansas  and  Hebraska 
Hill  uoutaiiied  language  which  was  soon  justifled.  In  pronouncing  the 
hill  "the  best  on  which  Coi^ress  ever  acted,"  he  eaid  that  it  amndled 
all  past  eomptomiaes  with  Slavery,  and  "thus  it  puts  Freedom  and 
Slavery  face  to  face,  and  bids  them  grapple."  And  this  was  the  ease  in 
Eoaton,  immediately  after  the  passage  of  the  bill,  when  a  fugitiye  slave 
was  surrendered.  The  indignation  was  general,  and  a  petition  for  the 
repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  was  extensively  signed,  in  the  follow- 
ing terms. 

"To  the  Honorable  the  Senate  and  House  of  Eaprasentatives  in  Congress 
neeembled:  The  undersigned,  men  of  Massachusetts,  ask  for  the  repeal  of 
the  Act  of  Congress  of  1S60  tiiown  as  the  Fugitive  Slave  Bill  ■' 

There  were  twenty-nine  hundred  petitioners,  among  whom  were  many 
who  had  heretofore  sustained  this  atrocious  measure ;  but  they  felt  at 
last  relieved  from  this  seiviee.  In  this  respect  this  petition  marks  an 
epoch  in  public  sentiment. 

Its  reception  in  the  Sena.ta  marks  an  epoch  there.  It  was  presented 
on  the  22d  of  June,  by  Mr.  Rockwell,  the  new  Senator  in  Mr.  Everett's 
place,  who  moved  its  reference  to  the  Committee  on  the  Judiciary: 
Other  petitions  of  like  character  had  been  treated  very  unceremoni- 
onsly.  This  was  debated  at  length,  and  finally  inferred  according  to 
the  motion  of  Mr.  Rockwell, 

On  the  2fith  of  Jane  the  debate  began,  in  which  Mr.  Jones,  of  Ten- 
nessee, Mr.  Kockwell,  of  Massachusetts,  then  again  Mr.  Jones,  and 
Mr.  Brodhead,  of  Pennsylvania,  took  part.  At  this  stage  Mr.  Snmner 
spoke  as  follows. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  BOSTON  PETITION  FOB  THE  REPEAL 


ME.  PEESIDENT,— I  begin  by  answering  the  in- 
terrogatory propounded  by  the  Senator  from  Ten- 
nessee [Mr.  Jones]  :  "  Can  any  one  suppose,  that,  if  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Act  be  repealed,  this  Union  can  exist  ? " 
To  which  I  reply  at  once,  that,  if  the  Union  be  in  any 
■way  dependent  on  an  act  —  I  cannot  call  it  a  law  —  so 
revolting  in  every  aspect  as  that  to  which  he  refers,  then 
it  ought  not  to  exist.  To  much  else  that  has  fallen  from 
that  Senator  I  do  not  desire  to  reply.  Matters  already 
handled  again  and  again,  in  the  long-drawn-out  debates 
of  tlris  session,  he  has  discussed  at  length.  Like  the 
excited  hero  of  Macedonia,  he  has  renewed  past  con- 
flicts, ■ — ■ 

"And  thrioo  hs  routed  all  his  foes,  and  tlirioe  lie  slew  the  slain." 

Of  what  the  Senator  said  on  the  relations  of  Senators, 
North  and  South,  of  a  particular  party,  it  is  not  my  prov- 
ince to  speak.  And  yet  I  do  not  turn  from  it  without 
expressing  at  least  some  confidence  that  men  from  the 
North,  whether  Whigs  or  Democrats,  wiU  neither  be  ca- 
joled by  any  temptation  nor  driven  by  any  lash  from 
the  support  of  those  principles  which  are  inseparable 
from  the  true  honor  and  vi'elfare  of  the  country.  At  last 
there  will  be,  I  trust,  a  backbone  in  the  Forth. 

My  colleague  has  already  remarked  that  this  petition 
proceeds  from  persons  many  of  whom  were  open  sup- 
porters of  the  alleged  Compromises  of  1850,  including 
even  the  odious  Fugitive  Slave  Act.  I  have  looked  over 
the  long  list,  and,  so  far  as  I  can  judge,  find  this  to  be 
true.  And,  in  my  opinion,  the  change  shown  by  these 
men  is  typical  of  the  change  in  the  community  of  which 
they  constitute  a  prominent  part.     Once  the  positive 


■cibyGoogIc 


OF  THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  357 

upholders  of  the  Pugitive  Slave  Act,  they  now  demand 
its  unconditional  repeal. 

There  is  another  circumstance  "worthy  of  especial  re- 
mark. This  petition  proceeds  mainly  from'  persons  con- 
nected with  trade  and  commerce.  Now  it  is  a  fact  too 
well  known  in  the  history  of  England,  and  of  our  own 
country,  that  these  persons,  while  often  justly  distin- 
guished by  individual  charities,  have  been  lukewarm  in 
opposition  to  Slavery.  Twice  in Enghsh  history  did  "the 
mercantile  interest"  frown  upon  endeavors  to  suppress 
the  ati-ocity  of  Algerine  Slavery ;  steadfastly  in  Ei^land 
it  soi^ht  to  bafHe  Wilberforce's  great  effort  for  the  abo- 
lition of  the  African  slave-trade  ;  and  at  the  formation  of 
our  own  Constitution,  it  stipulated  a  sordid  compromise, 
by  which  this  same  detested,  Heaven-deiying  traffic  was 
saved  for  twenty  years  from  American  judgment.  But 
now  it  is  all  changed, — at  least  in  Boston,  Eepresen- 
tatives  of  "  the  mercantile  interest "  place  themselves  in 
the  front  of  the  new  movement  against  Slavery,  and,  by 
their  explicit  memorial,  call  for  the  removal  of  a  griev- 
ance which  they  hare  bitterly  felt  in  Boston. 

Mr.  President,  this  petition  is  interesting  to  me,  first, 
as  it  asks  a  repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  and,  sec- 
ondly, as  it  comes  from  Massachusetts.  That  repeal  I 
shall  be  glad,  at  any  time,  now  and  hereafter,  as  in  times 
past,  to  sustain  by  vote  and  argument ;  and  I  trust  uever 
to  fail  in  any  just  regard  for  the  sentiments  or  interests 
of  Massachusetts.  With  these  few  remarks  I  would  gladly 
close.  But  there  has  been  an  arraignment,  here  to-day, 
both  of  myself  and  of  the  Commonwealth  which  I  rep- 
resent. To  all  that  has  been  said  of  myself  or  the  Com- 
monwealth, so  far  as  it  is  impeachment  of  either,  so 
far  as  it  subjects  either  to  any  real  censure,  I  plead 


■cibyGoogIc 


358  THE  BOSTON  PETITION   FOE  THE   liEPEAL 

openly,  for  myaelf  and  for  Massachusetta,  "  Not  guilty." 
But  pardon  me,  if  I  do  not  submit  to  be  tried  by  the 
Senate,  freali  from  the  injustice  of  the  Nebraska  Bill, 
In  the  language  of  the  Common  Law,  I  put  myself  upon 
"  God  and  the  country,"  and  claim  the  same  trial  for 
my  honored  Commonwealth. 

So  far  as  the  arraignment  touches  me  personally,  I 
hardly  care  to  speak.  It  is  true  that  I  have  not  hesi- 
tated, here  and  elsewhere,  to  express  my  open,  sincere, 
and  uneq^uivoeal  condemnation  of  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Act.  I  have  denounced  it  as  at  once  a  violation  of 
the  law  of  God,  and  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United 
States;  and  I  now  repeat  this  denunciation. 

Its  violation  of  the  Constitution  is  manifold ;  and 
here  I  repeat  but  what  I  have  often  said.  Too  often 
it  cannot  be  set  forth,  so  long  as  the  infamous  statute 
blackens  the  land. 

It  commits  the  great  question  of  human  freedom,  — 
than  ■which  none  is  more  sacred  in  the  law,  ■ —  not  to  a 
solemn  tiial,  but  to  summary  proceedings. 

It  commits  this  great  question,  not  to  one  of  the  high 
tribunals  of  the  land,  but  to  the  unaided  judgment  of  a 
single  petty  magistrate. 

It  commits  this  great  question  to  a  magistrate  ap- 
pointed, not  by  the  President  with  the  consent  of  the 
Senate,  but  by  the  Court,  —  holding  his  office,  not  dur^ 
ing  good  behavior,  but  merely  during  the  wiU  of  the 
Court,  —  and  receiving,  not  a  regiilar  salary,  but  fees 
according  to  each  individual  case. 
.  It  authorizes  judgment  on  ex  parte-  evidence,  by  affi- 
davit, without  the  sanction  of  cross-examination. 

It  denies  the  writ  of  habeas  corpiis,  ever  known  as  the 
palladium  of  the  citizen. 


■cibyGoogIc 


OF  THE  FUGirrtE   SLAVE  ACT.  do9 

Contrary  to  the  declared  purposes  of  the  framers  of 
the  Constitution,  it  sends  the  fi^itive  hack  "  at  the  puh- 
lic  expense."^ 

Addii^  meaimess  to  the  violation  of  the  Constitution, 
it  hrihes  the  Commissioner  hy  a  double  fee  to  pronounce 
against  Freedom.  K  he  dooms  a  man  to  Slavery,  the 
reward  is  ten  dollars ;  hut  savii^  him  to  Freedom,  his 
dole  is  five  dollars. 

This  is  enough,  hut  not  all.  On  two  other  capital 
grounds  do  I  oppose  the  Act  as  unconstitutional:  first, 
as  it  is  an  assumption  by  Congress  of  powers  not  del- 
egated by  the  Constitution,  and  in  derogation  of  the 
rights  of  the  States ;  and,  secondly,  as  it  takes  away 
that  essential  birthright  of  the  citizen,  trial  by  jury,  in  a 
question  of  personal  liberty  and  a  suit  at  Common  Law. 
Thus  obnoxious,  I  have  always  regarded  it  as  an  enact- 
ment totally  devoid  of  all  constitutional,  as  it  is  clearly 
devoid  of  all  moral  obligation,  while  it  is  disgraceful  to 
the  country  and  the  age.  And,  Sir,  I  have  hoped  and 
labored  for  the  creation  of  such  a  Public  Opinion,  firm, 
enlightened,  and  generous,  as  shoidd  render  this  Act 
practically  inoperative,  and  should  press,  without  ceas- 
ing, upon  Congress  for  its  repeal.  For  all  that  I  have 
thus  uttered  I  have  no  rt^'et  or  apology,  but  rather 
joy  and  satisfaction.  Glad  I  am  in  havmg  said  it; 
glad  1  am  now  in  the  opportunity  of  affirming  it  all 
anew.     Thus  much  for  myself. 

In  response  for  Massachusetts,  there  are  other  things. 
Something  siu^ly  must  be  pardoned  to  her  history.  In 
Massachusetts  stands  Boston.  In  Boston  stands  Faneuil 
HaU,  where,  throughout  the  perils  w!iich  preceded  the 
Eevolution,  our  patriot  fathers  assembled  to  vow  them- 

1  See  Madison's  DebaEea,  August  28, 1767. 


■cibyGoogIc 


360  THE   BOSTON   PETITION    FOR   THE   REPEAL 

selves  to  Freedom.  Here,  in  those  days,  spoke  James 
Otis,  full  of  the  thought  tliat  "  the  people's  safety  is  the 
law  of  God."^  Here,  also,  spoke  Joseph  Warren,  in- 
spired by  the  sentiment  that  "death  with  all  its  tor- 
tures is  preferable  to  Slavery."  ^  And  here,  also,  thun- 
dered John  Adams,  fervid  with  the  conviction  that 
"  consentii^  to  Slaveiy  is  a  sacril^ous  breach  of 
trust."  ^  Not  far  from  this  venerable  hall — between 
this  Temple  of  Freedom  and  the  very  coiirfc-house  to 
which  the  Senator  [Mr.  Jones]  has  referred  —  is  the 
street  where,  in  1770,  the  first  blood  was  spilt  in  con- 
flict between  British  troops  and  American  citizens,  and 
among  the  victims  was  one  of  that  African  race  which 
you  so  much  despise.  Almost  within  sight  is  Bunker 
Hill ;  further  off,  Lexington  and  Concord.  Amidst  these 
scenes  a  Slave-Hunter  from  Virginia  appears,  and  the 
disgusting  rites  begin  by  which  a  fellow-man  is  sacri- 
ficed. Sir,  can  you  wonder  that  our  people  are  moved  ? 
"  Who  c«n  be  iviee,  ninazed,  temperate  mid  furious, 
Loyal  imd  neutral,  in  a  moment?    Nvmtm." 

It  is  true  that  the  Slave  Act  was  with  difficulty  exe- 
cuted, and  that  one  of  its  servants  perished  in  the  mad- 
ness. On  these  grounds  the  Senator  from  Tennessee 
charges  Boston  with  fanaticism.  I  express  no  opinion 
on  the  conduct  of  individuals  ;  but  I  do  say,  that  the 
fanaticism  which  the  Senator  condemns  is  not  new  in 
Boston.  It  is  the  same  which  opposed  the  execution 
of  the  Stamp  Act,  and  finally  secured  its  repeal.  It  ia 
the  same  which  opposed  the  Tea  Tax.  It  is  the  fanati- 
cism which  finally  triumphed   on  Bunker   HilL     The 

1  EightaoftheBrittshColonie5(Boston,  1764),  p.10, 
*  Lettef  to  Edmund  Dano,  March  19,  1766;    Loi'ing's   Hundred  Boslcn 
Orators,  2d  ed.,  p.  51. 
"  "'        "   "  "le  Canon  and  Fendnl  Law;  Works,  Vol.  Ill  p.  463. 


■cibyGoogIc 


OF   THE   FUGITIVE    SLAVE   ACT.  361 

Senator  says  that  Boston  is  filled  with  traitors.  That, 
charge  ia  not  new.  Boston  of  old  was  the  home  of 
Hancock  and  Adams.  Her  traitors  now  are  those  who 
are  truly  animated  by  the  spirit  of  the  American  Eevo- 
lution.  In  condemning  them,  in  condemning  Massachu- 
setts, in  condemning  these  remonstrants,  you  simply  give 
proper  conclusion  to  the  utterance  on  this  floor,  that  the 
Declaration  of  Independence  is  "a  self-evident  lie." 

Here  I  might  leave  the  imputations  on  Massachu- 
setts, But  the  case  is  stronger  yet.  I  have  referred  to 
the  Stamp  Act.  The  parallel  is  of  such  aptness  and 
importance,  that,  though  on  a  former  occasion  I  pre- 
sented it  to  the  Senate,  I  cannot  forbear  from  pressing 
it  again.  As  the  precise  character  of  this  Act  may  not 
be  familiar,  allow  me  to  remind  the  Senate  that  it  was 
an  attempt  to  draw  money  from  the  Colonies  through  a 
stamp  tax,  while  the  determination  of  certain  questions 
of  forfeiture  under  the  statute  was  delegated,  not  to  the 
Courts  of  Common  Law,  but  to  Courts  of  Admiralty, 
without  trial  by  jury.  This  Act  was  denounced  in  the 
Colonies  at  its  passage,  as  contrary  to  the  British  Con- 
stitution, on  two  principal  grounds,  identical  in  char- 
acter with  the  two  chief  grounds  on  which  the  Slave 
Act  is  now  declaimed  to  be  unconstitutional :  fiist,  as  an 
assumption  by  Parliament  of  powers  not  belonging  to 
it,  and  an  infraction  of  rights  secured  to  the  Colonies ; 
and,  secondly,  as  a  denial  of  trial  by  jury  in  certain 
cases  of  property.  On  these  gi-ounds  the  Stamp  Act 
was  held  to  be  an  outrage. 

The  Colonies  were  aroused  E^ainst  it.     Virginia  first 

declaimed  herself  by  solemn  resolutions,  which  the  timid 

thought    "  treasonable,"  —  yes,  Sir,   "  treasonable,"  ^  — 

1  Hutchinson,  History  of  Massachusetts,  Vol.  III.  p.  119^ 


;db,Googlc 


362  THE  BOSTON   PETITION  FOE  THE  REPEAL 

just  as  that  word  is  now  applied  to  recent  manifesta- 
tions of  opinion  in  Boston,  —  eren  to  the  memorial  of 
her  twenty-nine  hundred  merchants.  But  these  "  trea- 
sonable" resolutions  soon  found  response.  New  York 
followed.  Massachusetts  came  next.  In  an  address 
from  the  Legislature  to  the  Governor,  the  true  ground 
of  opposition  to  the  Stamp  Act,  coincident  with  the  two 
radical  objections  to  the  Slave  Act,  are  clearly  set  forth, 
with  the  following  pregnant  conclusion  :  — 

"  We  deeply  regret  it  that  the  Parliament  has  seen  fit  to 
pass  such  an  act  aa  the  Stamp  Act;  we  flatter  ourselvea 
that  the  hardshijs  of  it  will  shortly  appear  to  them  in  such 
a  point  of  light  as  shall  induce  them,  iu  their  wisdom,  to 
repeal  it ;  in  the  mean  time  we  miist  beg  your  Exceileney  to 
excuse  tisfrom  doing  anything  to  assist  in  the  execution  0/  it."  ^ 

The  Stamp  Act  was  welcomed  in  the  Colonies  hy  the 
Tories  of  that  day,  precisely  as  the  unconstitutional 
Slave  Act  has  been  welcomed  by  an  imperious  class 
among  ns.  HutcMnson,  at  that  time  Lieutenant-Gov- 
ernor and  Judge  in  Massachusetts,  wrote  to  Ministers 


"The  Stamp  Act  is  received  among  ns  with  as  much 
decency  as  could  be  expected.  It  leaves  no  room  for  eva- 
sion, and  wOl  execute  itself," ' 

Like  duties  of  our  day,  in  chaises  to  Grand  Ju- 
ries, he  resolutely  vindicated  the  Act,  and  admonished 
"the  jurors  and  people"  to  obey.^  like  Governors  of 
our  day,  Bernard,  in  his  speech  to  the  Legislature  of 
Massachusetts,  demanded  iinreasoning  submission.     "  I 

3  Journnl  of  the  House  of  RepraBentatives  of  Mnssachusetts  Bay,  October 
24vlT6B,  p.  135.    Hutchinson.  Vol.  III.,  Appendix,  p.  474 
»  Bancroft,  History  of  the  United  States,  Vol.  V.  p.  272. 
s  Ibid. 


■cibyGoogIc 


OP  Tim  FUGITIVE   SLATE  ACT.  363 

shall  not,"  says  this  British  Governor,  "enter  into  any 
.disquisition  of  the  policy  of  the  Act.  I  have  only  to  say 
that  it  is  an  Act  of  the  Parliament  of  Great  Britain."  ^ 
The  elaborate  answer  of  Maissachusetts  —  the  work  of 
Samuel  Adams,  one  of  the  piUara  of  our  history  —  was 
pronounced  "  the  ravings  of  a  parcel  of  wild  enthusi- 
asts," ^  even  as  recent  proceedings  in  Boston,  resulting 
in  the  memorial  before  you,  have  been  characterized  on 
this  floor.     Am  I  not  right  in  this  parallel  ? 

The  country  was  aroused  agtunst  the  execution  of  the 
Act.  And  here  Boston  took  the  lead.  In  formal  in- 
structions to  her  Eepresentatives,  adopted  unanimously 
in  town  meeting  at  Paneuil  Hall,  the  following  rule  of 
conduct  was  p 


"We  therefore  think  it  our  indispensable  duty,  in  jus- 
tice to  oui^elves  and  posterity,  as  it  is  our  undoubted  privi- 
lege, in  the  most  open  and  unreserved,  but  decent  and  re- 
spectfiil  terms,  to  declare  our  greatest  disaatisfafition  with 
this  law  ;  and  we  think  it  incv/mbent  v^xya  yaw  by  no  means 
to  join  in  any  public  meamreg  for  countenancing  and  asdsting 
in  tlie  execution  of  the  same,  but  to  use  your  best  endeavors 
in  the  General  Assembly  to  have  the  inherent,  unalienable' 
rights  of  the  people  of  this  Province  asserted  and  vindicated, 
and  left  upon  the  public  records,  that  posterity  may  never 
have  reason  to  charge  the  present  times  with  the  guilt  of 
tamely  given  them  away."  ' 

The  opposition  spread  and  deepened,  with  a  natural 
tendency  to  outbreak  and  violence.  On  one  occasion 
in  Boston,  it  showed  itself  in  the  lawlessness  of  a  mob 
most  formidable  in  character,  even  as  is  now  charged. 

1  Jonmal  of  the  House  of  Raprasentalives,  Septembci'  25,  176S,  p.  119. 
Hutohineon,  Vol.  III.  p.  4a7. 
»  Bnnoroft,  History  of  tli9  United  Sfafm,  Vol.  V,  p.  348. 
0  Boston  Gazette,  September  23, 1766. 


■cibyGoogIc 


364  THE   BOSTON   PETTriON.  FOR  THE   EEPEAL 

Liberty,  in  her  struggles,  is,  too  often  driven  to  force. 
But  the  town,  at  a  pubhc  meeting  in  Fane^il  Hall, 
called  without  delay,  on  the  motion  of  the  opponents, 
of  the  Stamp  Act,  with  James  Otis  as  Chairman,  con- 
demned the  outrage.  Eager  in  hostility  to  the  execu-- 
tion  of  the  Act,  Boston  cherished  municipal  order,  andi 
constantly  discountenanced  all  tumult,  violence,  and 
illegal  proceeding.  On  these  two  grounds  she  tlien. 
stood  :  and  her  position  was  widely  recognized.  In  re- 
ply, March  24,  1766,  to  an  address  from  the  inhabitants 
of  Plymouth,  her  own  consciousness  of  duty  done  is^ 
thus  expressed :  -^ 

"  If  the  inhabitants  of  this  metropolis  have  taken  the  war- 
rantable and  legal  meastireB  to  prevent  that  misfortune,  of  all 
others  the  mmt  to  he  dreaded,  the  execution  oftM  Stamp  AelySmd, 
as.ft  necessary  means  of  preventing  it,  havfi.made  any  spirited, 
applications  for  opening  the  eustom-houseB  and  courts  of 
justice,  ^i/i  at  the  same  time,  they  have  bore  tkeir  lestiiM)n}f 
offainst  oiOraffeoue  t^mv-Us  and  iUegal  proceedings,  soiA  given: 
any  example,  of  the  love  of  peace  and  good  order,  nest  to, 
the  conscioiisnesB  of  having  done  their  duty  is  the  satisfac- 
tion of  meeting  with  the  approbation  of,  any  of  their  fel- 
low-countrymen." ^ 

Thus  was  the  Stamp  Act  annulled,  even  before  its 
actual  repeal,  which  was  pressed  with  assiduity  by  peti- 
tion and  remonstrance,  at  the  next  meeting  of  Parha- 
ment.  Among  potent,  influences  was  the  entire  concur- 
rence of  the  merchants,  and  especially  a  remonstrance 
against  the  Stamp  Act  by  merchants  of  New  York,  like 
that  now  made  against  the  Slave  Act  by  merchants  of 
Boston.  Some  at  fii^t  sought  only  its  mitigation.  Even 
James  Otis  b^an  with  this  moderate  ■aim.     The  King 

I  Boston  Gazette,  Mnrcli  31,  ITfifi, 


■cibyGoogIc 


OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  3C5 

himself  showed  a  disposition  to  yield  to  this  extent. 
But  Franklin,  who  was  then  in  England,  when  asked 
whether  the  Colonies  would  suhmit  to  the  Act,  if  miti- 
gated in  certain  paiiacularSj  replied  :  "  No,  never,  unless 
compelled  by  force  of  arms"^  Then  it  was  that  the 
great  Commoner  Vi  lUiam  Pitt  in  in  ever  memorable 
speech,  uttered  words  which  htly  helong  to  this  oi, 
casion.    He  s'ud  — 

"  Sir,  I  have  been  obliged  w  th  gning  biith  to  ^ition 
in  America,  They  hi\e  ipoken  the  i  aeatiments  with  tree 
dom  against  this  unhippi  Aofc  and  t\  it  fieedoni  hia  be 
come  their  crime  S  ny  I  am  to  heir  tl  e  1  beity  of  speech 
in  this  House  imputed  as  i  ciime  Bit  the  imiutition 
shall  not  discourage  me  It  is  a  liberty  I  mean  to  oxerc  se 
No  gentleman  ou^ht  to  le  afiiil  to  exor  iso  t  It  is  a 
hberty  by  which  the  gentleman  nh  cil  mniates  it  ra  j,ht 
have  profited.  He  o  i^ht  to  have  profited  He  ou^ht  to 
have  desisted  fiom  his  project  The  gentleman  telk  ua 
America  is  obstinate  \merica  is  almost  m  open  lebellion.  I 
rejoice  that  Amer  ca  has  lesisted.  Three  millions  of  people 
so  dead  to  all  the  feelmgs  f  Liberty  la  voluntaiil}  to  submit 
to  be  slaves,  wo  dd  have  been  hi  instruments  to  make  slaves 
of  the  rest.  .  .  I  wo  dd  not  delate  a  paiticulai  point  of 
law  with  the  gentleman  b  it  I  dnw  my  ideis  of  Fieedom 
from  the  vital  powers  of  the  Put  ah  ConstitutKU  — not  fiom 
the  crude  and  fallaci  us  noti  na  too  much  rehed  upon  as  if 
we  were  but  in  the  morning  of  Liberty  I  can  ackujwledge 
no  veneration  foi  anj  procedure  Kw  or  otdinance  that  is 
repugnant  to  reason  and  the  first  elements  jf  oui  C  nstitu 

tion The  \menoans  bave  been  wronged      They  have 

been  driven  to  madness  by  injustice  Upon  the  whole 

I  will  beg  leave  to  tell  the  House  what  is  really  my  opinion. 

Ji  is,  that  th£  Stamp  Act  be  repealed,  ahsol-uiely,  totally,  and 

1  Haneavd,  Parlianieiitary  History,  XVL  HO. 


■cibyGoogIc 


366  THE  BOSTON  PETITION  FOR  THE  REPEAL 

iw.m.ediately,  — ■  that  the  reason  for  tk^  r^al  be  assigned,  be- 
Thus  spoke  this  great  orator,  at  the  time  tutelary 
gimrdian  of  American  Liberty.  He  was  not  unheeded. 
Within  leas  than  a  year  from  its  original  passage,  the 
Stamp  Act  —  assailed  as  unconstitutional  on  the  precise 
grounds  which  I  now  occupy  in  assailing  the  Slave  Act 
—  was  driven  from  the  statute-book 

Sir,  the  Stamp  Act  was^  at  most,  an  infringement  of 
civil  liberty  only,  not  of  personal  liberty.  How  often 
must  I  say  this  ?  It  touched  questions  of  property  only, 
and  not  the  personal  liberty  of  any  man.  Under  it,  no 
freeman  could  be  seized  as  a  slave.  There  was  an  un- 
just tax  of  a  few  pence,  with  the  chance  of  amercement 
by  a  single  judge  without  jury  ;  but  by  this  statute  no 
person  could  be  deprived  of  that  vital  right  of  all  which 
is  to  other  rights  as  soul  to  body,  —  the  right  of  a  man 
to  hiTuself.  Who  can  fail  to  see  the  difference  between 
the  two  cases,  and  how  far  the  tyranny  of  the  Slave  Act 
is  beyond  the  tyranny  of  the  Stamp  Act  ?  The  difference 
is  inmeasurable.     And  this  will  yet  be  pronounced  by 


I  call  upon  you,  then,  to  receive  the  petition,  and 
hearken  to  its  prayer.  All  other  petitions  asldi^  for 
change  in  existing  legislation  are  ti'eated  with  respect, 
promptly  referred  and  acted  upon.  This  should  not  be 
an  exception.  The  petition  asks  simply  the  repeal  of 
an  obnoxious  statute,  which  is  entirely  within  the  com- 
petency of  Congress.  It  proceeds  from  a  laige  number 
of  respectable  citizens,  whose  autograph  sigratures  are 
attached.     It  is  brief  and  respectful,  and,  in  its  very 

I  HansHrf,  Parliamentary  Hietory,  XVI,  103-108.  BfuiovoH,  History  of 
the  United  Slates,  V.  891-396. 


■cibyGoogIc 


OF  THE  FUGITIVK   SLAVE  ACT.  367 

brevity,  showa  that  spirit  of  freedom  wliich  should 
awaken  a  generous  response.  In  refusing  to  receive  it 
or  refer  it,  according  to  the  usage  of  the  Senate,  or  in 
treatii^  it  with  any  indignity,  you  offer  an  affront  not 
only  to  these  numerous  petitioners,  hut  also  to  the  great 
Eight  of  Petition,  which  is  never  more  sacred  than 
when  exercised  in  behalf  of  Freedom  against  an  odious 
enactment.  Permit  me  to  add,  that  by  this  course 
you  provoke  the  very  spirit  which  you  would  repress. 
There  is  a  plant  which  is  said  to  grow  when  trodden 
upon.  It  remains  to  be  seen  if  the  Boston  petitioners 
have  not  something  of  this  quality.  But  this  I  know, 
Sir,  —  that  the  Slave  Act,  like  Vice,  is 


And  the  occurrences  of  this  day  will  make  it  visible  t 
the  people  in  new  forms  of  injustice. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS: 

OATH  TO  SUPPORT  THE  CONSTITUTION;  WEAKNESS 
OF  THE  SOUTH  IBOM  SLATERY. 

Sbcokd  Speech  in  the  Senate  on  the  Boston  Petition  for  the 
Eepbal  op  the  Fuqitivb  Slave  Act,  Juke  28,  1854. 


The  preceilmg  speech,  was  foUowed  by  a  delate  without  example  in 
anger,  excitement,  and  brutality.  Mr.  Butler,  of  South  Carolina,  Mr. 
Mason,  of  Virginia,  Mr.  Pettit,  of  Indiana,  Mr,  Dixon,  of  Kentucky, 
Mr.  Mallory,  of  Florida,  oud  Mr.  Clay,  of  Alabama,  Tied  with  each 
other  in  bullying  dennnciation  of  Mr.  Smnner. 

Mr.  Butler  began  by  claiming  that  the  American  Bevolniion  was 
carried  through  by  "skTeholding  States,"  thus  making  hoast  for 
Slavery,  —  and  then  turned  to  pour  contempt  upon  Mr.  Sumner,  whose 
speech  he  eharaoterized  be  "  a  species  of  rhetoric  intended  to  feed  the 
lires  of  fanaticism  in  his  own  State  "  ;  then  it  was  "a  Fourth  of  July 
Oration," —  "vapid  rlietotic," —  "a  species  of  rhetoric  which  ought 
not  to  come  from  a  scholar," — "a  rhetoric  with  more  fine  color 
than  real  strength"  ;  and  then  he  announced,  "If  sectional  agita- 
tion is  to  be  fed  by  such  sentiments,  such  displays,  and  such  things 
m  come  from,  the  honorable  gentleman  near  me,  I  say  we  ought  not 
to  be  in  a  common  confederacy,  and  we  should  be  better  off  with- 
out it."  Then  again,  "  If  the  object  be  to  malto  the  issue  between 
the  North  and  the  South,  let  the  issue  come."  He  then  asked  if 
Massachusetts  "would  send  fugitives  back  to  us  after  trial  by  juiy 
or  any  other  mode  ? "  Then,  turning  to  Mr.  Sumner,  he  demanded, 
with  much  impetuosity  of  manner,  "  Will  this  honorable  Senator  tell 
me  that  he  will  do  it  1 "  To  which  Mr.  Sumner  promptly  replied, 
"Is  thy  servant  a  dog,  that  he  sliould  do  this  thing!"  The  Globe 
reporta  the  disorderly  ejaculations  which  followed  ftom  Mr.  Butler, 
winding  up  with  the  words,  "  You  stand  in  my  presence  as  a  coequal 
Senator,  and  tell  me  that  it  is  a  dog's  office  to  execute  the  Constitu- 


;db,Googlc 


EEPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  369 

tion  of  the  United  States  ?"  Here  Mr.  Sumner  remarked,  "I  recog- 
nizu  no  auuh  obligation,"  —  meaning,  plainly,  no  obligation  to  return 
a  I'ugitivB  slave. 

Mr.  Mason,  afterwards  so  conspieuoua  in  the  Eetellion,  followed  in 
similar  vein.  He  bi^n  hj  saying  i  "  I  say.  Sir,  the  dignity  of  the 
American  Senate  has  been  mdelj',  wantonly,  grossly  assailed  by  a  Sen- 
ator from  Massachusetts  — andnot  onl)  the  (Iignity  of  thH  Senate,  but  of 
the  whole  people  tnfled  with  in  the  presence  of  the  American  Senate, 
either  iguonmtlj  or  eomiitlj  1  do  not  know  which  nor  do  I  care." 
He  then  proceeded  to  vindicate  the  gentleman  Aom  Virginia"  who 
had  sought  his  (.lave  in  Boston  dcnonncel  Mi  Sumner  for  having 
"the  boldness  to  speak  here  of  such  a  man  as  a  slave- hunter,"  and 
boasted  that  the  law  hoi  been  executed  m  Boston  — that  "ju  that 
city,  vfithin  the  lait  furtnigEit  it  has  done  its  office  and  done  it  in 
the  presence  of  a  m  )b  u  hich  that  Senator  and  his  asMciates  reused 
and  inflamed  to  the  verj  vei^  of  treason  subjecting  them  to  ti-ai- 
tors'  doom,  while  he  and  his  associates  sat  heie  and  kept  themselves 
aloof  irom  dangtr  Then  he  e^itlaimed  Whj  Sn  am  1  speaking 
of  a  fanatic,  one  whose  leason  is  dethroned?  Can  anchaone  expect 
to  make  impressions  upon  the  Amem-an  people  from  his  vapid,  vn^ar 
declamation  here,  accompanied  by  a  declaration  that  he  would  violate 
lus  oath  now  recently  taken  ?" 

All  that  was  said  by  these  two  representatives  of  Slavery  was  in- 
tensified and  a^ravated  by  Mr.  Pettit,  of  Indiana,  who  chained  Mr. 
Samner  with  openly  declaring  in  the  Senate  that  he  would  violate  hia 
oath,  and  then  pt'oceeded  to  foi'eshadow  a  preposition  for  liis  expul- 
sion. At  the  somb  time  he  vindicated  at  length  his  origitial  statement, 
that  the  construction  pnt  upon  the  Declaration  of  Independence  by 
the  Abolitionists  of  the  country  "made  it  a  self-evident  lie,  instead  of 
a  self-evident  tmth."  At  this  stage  the  Senate  adjourned,  leaving  the 
question  Of  referelicB  still  pending. 

The  next  day  was  occupied  by  other  hnsiness,  contrary  to  the  de- 
clared desire  of  Mr.  Sumner,  who  said  that  he  had  "  something  farther 
to  say"  upon  the  petition.  On  the  28th  of  June  the  attack  on  Mr.  Sum- 
ner was  renewed  by  Mr.  Pettit,  bnt  without  taking  up  the  petition. 
An  attempt  was  made  to  stifle  further  debate.  Motions  to  postpone, 
and  then  to  lay  on  the  table,  were  proposed,  when  Mr.  Snmnet  re- 
marked ;  — 

I  AM  unwilling  to  stand  in  the  way  of  the  gen- 
eral wish  of  the  Senate  to  go  on  with  its 


■cibyGoogIc 


370  REPLY   TO   ASSAILANTS. 

desire  at  all  times  to  promote  its  business ;  but  this 
question  has  been  presented  and  debated.  Several 
Senators  have  already  expressed  themselves  on  it. 
Other  Senator's  within  my  knowledge  expect  to  be 
heard.  I  too.  Sir,  claim  the  privilege  of  being  heard 
again,  in  reply  to  remarks  which  have  fallen  from  hon- 
orable Senators.  I  hope,  therefore,  the  memorial  will 
have  no  disposition  that  shall  preclude  its  complete 


The  Senate  refused  to  postpone,  and  Mr.  Malloiy,  of  Florida, 
afterwards  Secretary  of  the  Navy  in  the  cabinet  of  JeffeTsoii  Davis, 
began  the  assault  oa  Mr.  Sunuier,  expressing  hoiTov  at  his  Jeolarn.' 
tions  in  the  Senate,  and  then  adducing  his  early  language  in  the 
Boston  speech  so  often  referred  to.  The  future  reliel  dwelt  with  unc- 
tion on  the  obligations  of  an  oath,  saying  :  "  Sir,  if  there  he  any  prin- 
cijile  in  the  breast  of  the  American  citizen  which  more  than  any 
other  lies  at  the  foundation  of  law,  morals,  and  society,  it  is  his  ha- 
bitual obfiervance  and  recognition  of  all  the  eaered  obligations  of  an 
oath ;  and  thia  no  inan  knows  better  than  the  Senator  himself," 
Mr.  Clay,  of  Alabama,  afterwards  a  violent  rebel,  succeeded  in  in- 
terpolating into  the  speech  ot  Mr.  Mallory  a  tirade  of  ]iersonality 
and  brutality,  wliioh  will  he  found  in  tJie  Globe,  and,  after  jiresent- 
ing  a  portrait  meant  for  Mr.  Sumner,  "who  held  hiniself  irrespon- 
sible to  all  law,  feeling  the  obligation  neither  of  the  Divine  law,  nor 
of  the  law  of  the  land,  nor  of  Urn  law  of  honor,"  proceeded  to  aa>, 
"How  would  such  a  miscreant  be  treated!  Why,  if  you  could  not 
reach  hiin  with  the  arm  of  the  munioipa!  law,  if  you  couid  not 
send  him  to  the  Penitentiary,  yoii  would  senrf  Mm  to  CovnUry." 
And  the  orator  of  Slavery  wound  up  by  saying :  "  If  we  cajinot  re- 
Btrain  or  prevent  this  eternal  warfare  upon  the  feelings  and  rights 
of  Southern  gentlemen,  we  may  rob  the  serpent  of  his  fangs,  we  can 
paralyze  his  influence,  by  placing  him  in  that  nadir  of  soeial  degra- 
dation which  he  merits." 

This  brief  account  of  the  debate  is  important,  as  showing  the  at- 
mosphere of  the  Senate,  ajid  the  personal  pTOvocation,  when  Mr. 
Sumner  at  last  obtained  the  floor  and  spoko  as  follows. 


;db,Googlc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS. 


ME.  PKESIDENT,  — Since  I  had  the  honor  of 
addressing  the  Senate  two  days  ago,  various 
Senators  liave  spoken.  Of  these,  several  have  alluded 
to  me  in  terms  clearly  beyond  the  sanction  of  par- 
liamentary debate.  Of  this  I  make  no  complaint, 
though,  for  the  honor, of  the  Senate,  at  least,  it  were 
well,  had  it  been  otherwise.  If  to  them  it  seems  fit, 
courteous,  parliamentary,  let  them 

"  unpack  the  hflan  wilh  words, 
And  fall  H-cnraing,  like  a  veiy  drab, 

I  will  not  interfere  with  the  enjoyment  they  find  in 
such  exposure  of  themselves.  They  have  given  us  a 
taste  of  their  q^uality.  Two  of  them,  the  Senator  from 
South  Carolina  [Mr.  Butler],  who  sits  immediately  be- 
fore me,  and  the  Senator  from  Vii^nia  [Mr.  Mason], 
who  sits  immediately  behind  me,  are  not  young.  Their 
heads  are  amply  crowned  by  Time.  They  did  not  speak 
from  any  ebullition  of  youth,  but  from  the  confirmed 
temper  of  age.  It  is  melancholy  to  believe  that  in  this 
debate  they  showed  themselves  as  they  are.  It  were 
charitable  to  believe  that  they  are  in  reality  better  than 
they  showed  themselves. 

I  think.  Sir,  that  I  am  not  the  only  person  on  this 
floor,  who,  listening  to  these  two  self-confident  cham- 
pions of  that  peculiar  fanaticism  of  the  South,  was  re- 
minded of  the  striking  words  of  Jefferson,  picturing  the 
influence  of  Slavery,  where  he  says :  "  The  whole  com- 
merce between  master  and  slave  is  a  perpetual  exercise 
of  the  most  boisterous  passions,  the  most  unremitting 
despotism,  on  the  one  part,  and  degrading  submission  on 
the  other.    Our  children  see  this,  and  learn  to  imitate  it; 


■cibyGoogIc 


■37S  REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS. 

for  man  is  an  imitative  animal The  parent  storms. 

The  child  looks  on,  catches  the  lineaments  of  wrath, 
puts  on  the  same  airs  in  the  circle  of  smaller  slaves, 
gives  a  lotse  to  the  worst  of  passions,  and,  thus  nursed, 
educated,  and  daily  exercised  in  tyranny,  cannot  but  be 
stamped  by  it  with  odious  peculiarities.  The  man  must 
be  a  prodigy,  who  can  retain  his  manners  and  morals 
wnde^amd  by  siieh  eireumstances."  ^  Nobody,  who  wit- 
nessed the  Senator  from  South  Cai-oliiia  or  the  Senator 
from  Viiginia  in  this  debate,  will  place  either  of  them 
among  the  "  prodigies "  described  by  Jefferson.  As 
they  spoke,  the  Senate  Chamber  must  have  seemed  to 
them,  in  the  characteristic  fantasy  of  the  moment,  a 
plantation  well-stocked  with  slaves,  over  which  the  lash 
of  the  overseer  had  free  swing..  Sir,  it  gives  me  no 
pleasure  to  say  these  tilings.  It  is  not  according  to  my 
nature.  Bear  witness  that  I  do  it  only  in  just  self- 
defence  against  the  unprecedented  assaults  and  provo- 
cations of  this  debate.  In  doing  it,  I  desire  to  warn 
certain  Senators,  that,  if,  by  any  ardor  of  menace,  or  by 
any  tyrannical  frown,  they  expect  to  shake  my  fixed 
resolve,  they  expect  a  vain  thing. 

There  is  little  that  fell  from  these  two  champions, 
as  the  fit  was  on,  which  deserves  reply.  Certainly  not 
the  hard  words  they  used  so  readily  and  congenially. 
The  veteran  Senator  from  Virginia  [Mr.  Mason]  com- 
plained that  I  had  characterized  one  of  his  "  constitu- 
ents "  —  a  person  who  went  all  the  way  from  Virginia 
to  Boston  in  pursuit  of  a  slave — as  Slave-Hunter.  Sir, 
I  choose  to  call  things  by  their  right  names.  White  I 
call  white,  and  black  I  call  black.  And  where  a  person 
degrades  himself  to  the  work  of  chasing  a  fellow-man, 
1  Notes  on  Vii^inra,  Query  XVIIL 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  373 

who,  under  the  inspiration  of  Freedom  and  the  guid- 
ance of  the  North  Star,  has  sought  a  freeman's  home  far 
away  from  ooffle  and  chain, — that  person,  whosoever  be 
may  be,  I  call  Slave-Hunter.  If  the  Senator  from  Vir- 
ginia, who  professes  nicety  of  speech,  will  give  me  any 
term  more  precisely  describing  such  an  individual,  I 
will  use  it.  Until  then,  I  must  continue  to  use  the 
language  which  seems  to  me  so  apt  But  this  very 
sensibility  of  the  veteran  Senator  at  a  just  term,  truly 
depicting  an  odious  character,  shows  a  .shame  which 
pleases  me.  It  was  said  by  a  philosopher  of  Antic[uity 
that  a  blush  is  the  sign  of  virtue ;  and  permit  me  to 
add,  that,  in  this  violent  sensibility,  I  recognize  a  blush 
mantling  the  cheek  of  the  honorable  Senator,  which 
even  hia  plantation  manners  cannot  conceal 

And  the  venerable  Senator  from  South  Carolina,  too, 
[Mr  EuTLER,]  —  he  has  betrayed  his  sensibility.  Here 
let  me  say  that  this  Senator  knows  well  that  I  always 
hsten  with  pecuhai  pleasure  to  his  racy  and  exuberant 
speech,  as  it  gui^les  foxth,  —  sometimes  tinctured  by 
generous  ideas, —  except  when,  forgetful  of  history,  and 
m  defiance  of  reason,  he  undertakes  to  defend  what  is 
obviously  indefensible  This  Senator  was  disturbed, 
when,  to  Iiis  mqiury,  peisonaUy,  pointedly,  and  vehe- 
mentlj  addressed  to  rae,  whether  I  would  join  in  return- 
ing a  feUow-man  to  Slavery,  I  exclaimed:  "Is  thy 
servant  a  dog,  that  he  should  do  this  thing  ?  "  In  fitful 
phrase,  which  seemed  to  come  from  unconscious  excite- 
ment, so  common  with  the  Senator,  he  shot  forth  various 
cries  about  "  dogs,"  and,  among  other  things,  asked  if 
there  was  any  "  dog  "  in  the  Constitution  ?  The  Sena- 
tor did  not  seem  to  bear  in  mind,  through  the  heady 
currents  of  that  moment,  that,  by  the  false  interpreta- 


■cibyGooglc 


374  EEPLY  TO   ASSAILANTS. 

tioti  Jie  fastens  upon  the  Constitution,  he  has  helped  to 
nurture  there  a  whole  kennel  of  Carolina  hloodhounds, 
trained,  with  savi^e  jaw  and  insatiable  scent,  for  the 
hunt  of  flying  bondmen.  No,  Sir,  I  do  not  believe  that 
there  is  any  "kennel  of  bloodhotmda,"  or  even  any 
"dog,"  in  the  Constitution. 

Eutj  Mr.  President,  since  the  brief  response  -which  I 
made  to  the  inc[uiiy  of  tlie  Senator,  and  which  leaped 
unconsciously  to  my  lips,  has  drawn  upon  me  such 
various  attacks,  all  marked  by  grossness  of  language 
and  manner,  —  since  I  have  been  chained  with  openly 
declaring  a  purpose  to  violate  the  Constitution,  and  to 
break  the  oath  which  I  have  taken  at  that  desk,  I  shaU 
be  pardoned  for  showing  simply  how  a  few  plain  words 
will  put  all  this  down.  The  authentic,  report  in  the 
"  Globe  "  shows  what  was  actually  said.  The  report  in 
the  "  Sentinel "  is  substantially  the  same.  And  one  of 
the  New  York  papers,  which  has  been  put  into  my 
hands  since  I  entered  the  Senate  Chamber  to-day,  under 
its  telegraphic  head,  states  the  incident  with  substantial 
accuracy,  —  though  it  omits  the  personal,  individual  ap- 
peal addressed  to  me  by  the  Senator,  and  preserved  in 
the  "  Globe."     Here  is  the  New  York  report. 

"  Mb.  Butler.  I  would  like  to  ask  the  Senator,  if  Con- 
gress repealed  the  Fugitive  Slave  Law,  would  Massachusetts 
execute  the  Constitutional  requirements,  and  send  back  to 
the  South  the  absconding  Blaves? 

"  Mb.  Sumnee,  Do  you  ask  me  if  I  would  send  back  a 
slave? 

"  Mr.  Butler.    Why,  yes. 

"  Mr.  Sumner.  '  Is  thy  servant  a  dog,  that  he  shoidd  do 
this  thing  j '  "  1 

1  Hew  York  Daily  Times.  June  2T,  1861. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEFLT  TO  ASSAILANTS.  375 

To  any  candid  mind,  either  of  tliese  reports  renders 
anything  further  superfluous.  The  answer  ia  explicit 
and  ahove  impeachment.  Indignantly  it  spurns  a  ser- 
vice from  which  tlie  soul  recoils,  while  it  denies  no  con- 
stitutional obligation.  But  Senators  who  are  so  swift 
in  misrepresentation,  and  in  assault  upon  me  as  disloyal 
to  the  Constitution,  deserve  to  be  exposed,  and  it  shall 
be  done. 

Now,  Sir,  I  begin  by  adopting  as  my  guide  the  au- 
thoritative words  of  Andrew  Jackson,  in  1832,  in  his 
memorable  veto  of  the  Bank  of  the  United  States.  To 
his  course  at  that  critical  time  were  opposed  the  au- 
thority of  the  Supreme  Court  and  his  oath  to  mp^ori 
the  Constitution.     Here  is  his  triumphant  reply. 

"If  the  opinion  of  the  Supreme  Court  covered  the  whole 
ground  of  this  Act,  it  ought  not  to  control  the  coordinate  au- 
thorities of  this  Government  The  Congress,  the  Executive, 
and  the  Court  must,  each  for  itself,  be  guided  by  its  own  opin- 
ion of  the  Constitution.  Each,  public  officer,  who  taJces  an  oath 
to  support  the  Consbiivtion,  swears  tJiat  he  will  gjipport  it  as  he 
understands  it,  and  not  as  it  is  understood  hy  others.  It  is  as 
much  the  duty  of  the  House  of  Representatives,  of  the  Sen- 
ate, and  of  the  President,  to  decide  upou  the  constitutionality 
of  any  bill  or  resolution  which  may  be  presented  to  them  for 
passage  or  approval,  as  it  is  of  the  Supreme  Judges,  when  it 
may  be  brought  before  them  for  judicial  decision-  ....  The 
authority  of  the  Supreme  Court  must  not,  therefore,  be  per- 
mitted to  control  the  Congress  or  the  Executive,  when  acting 
in  their  legislative  capacities,  but  to  have  only  such  influence 
as  the  force  of  their  reasoning  may  deserve."  * 

Mark  these  words  :  "  Each  public  officer,  who  takes 
an  oath  to  support  the  Constitution,  swears  that  he  will 
1  Senate  Journal,  23d  Cong.  1st  Ses3.,  pp.  138,  439. 


■cibyGoogIc 


376  REPLY   TO   ASSAILAKTS. 

support  it  as  he  understands  it,  and  not  as  it  is  under- 
atood  by  others."  Yes,  Sir,  as  he  understands  it,  and 
not  as  it  is  understood  hy  others.  Does  any  Senator 
here  dissent  from  this  rule?  Does  the  Senator  from 
Virginia  ?  Does  the  Senator  from  South  Carolina  ? 
[Here  Mr.  Sumrter  paused,  Intt  tJi&re  was  no  reply."]  At 
all  events,  I  accept  the  rule  as  just  and  reasonable, — 
in  harmony,  too,  let  me  assert,  with  that  Liberty  -which 
scorns  the  dogma  oi  passim  obedience,  and  asserts  the  in- 
estimable right  of  private  judgment,  whether  in  religion 
or  politics.  In  swearing  to  support  the  Constitution  at 
your  desk,  Mr.  President,  I  did  not  swear  to  support  it 
as  you  understand  it,  —  oh,  no.  Sir !  —  or  as  the  Senator 
from  Virginia  understands  it,  —  by  no  means !  —  or  as 
the  Senator  from  South  Carolina  understands  it,  with  a 
kennel  of  bloodhoimds,  or  at  least  a  "  dog  "  in  it,  "  paw- 
ing to  get  free  his  hinder  parts,"  in  pursuit  of  a  slava 
No  such  thing.  Sir,  I  swore  to  siipport  the  Constitution 
as  I  understand  it,  —  nor  more,  nor  less. 

But  Andrew  Jackson  was  not  alone  in  this  rule  of 
conduct.  Statesmen  before  and  since  have  declared  it 
also, — nobody  with  more  force  and  constancy  than  Jef- 
ferson, who  was,  indeed,  the  author  of  it,  so  far  as  any- 
body can  be  the  author  of  what  springs  so  obviously 
from  common  sense.  Repeatedly  he  returns  to  it,  ex- 
pressing it  in  various  forms.  "  Each  department,"  he 
insists,  "  is  truly  independent  of  the  others,  and  has  an 
equal  right  to  decide  for  itself  what  is  the  meaitiny  of 
the  Constitution  in  the  cases  submitted  to  its  action,  and. 
especially  where  it  is  to  act  ultimately  and  without  ap- 
peal." ^  I  content  myself  with  a  single  text  from  this 
1  Letter  to  Judge  Boane,  Sept.  6, 1819:  WriUngs,  Vol.  VII.  p.  186.  See 
nlBO,  p.  178,  Letter  to  Mr.  J«rvif,  Sapt.  28, 1820;  and,, Vol..  VI.  pp.  461,  «a, 
Letter  to  W.  H.  Torrance,  June  11,  1815. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  377 

authority.  The  same  rule  was  also  announced  by  Hon. 
,  John  Holmes,  a  Representative  from.  Massachusetts,  af- 
terwards. Senator  from  Maine,  in  the  famous  debate  on 
the  admission  of  Missouri.  "This  Constitution,"  h,e 
declares,  "which  I  hold  in  my  hand,  I  am  sworn  to 
support,  not  accordii^  to  legislative  or  judicial  expo- 
sition, hut  as  I  shall  wnd&rstand  it."  ^  Here  is  the  rule 
of  Jackson,  almost  in  his  language,  twelve  years  before 
he  uttered  it. 

And  since  Jackson  we  have  the  rule  stated  with 
great  point  in  this  very  Chamber,  by  no  less  an  author- 
ity —  at  least  with  Democrats  —  than  Mr.  Buchanan. 
Here  are  a  few  words  from  his  speech  on  the  United 
States  Bank 

"  If  all  the  judges  and  all  the  lawyers  in  Christendom  had 
decided  in  the  affirmative,  when  the  question  is  thus  brought 
home  to  me  as  a  legislator,  bound  to  vote  for  or  against  a 
new  charter,  iipon  my  oath  to  support  the  Constitution, 
/  mmt  exercise  my  own  judgment.  I  would  treat  with  pro- 
fpund  respect  the  arguments  and  opinions  of  judges  and 
qonatitutionaJ  lawyers ;  but  if  after  all  they  failed  to  con- 
vince me  that  the  law  was  constitutional,  I  should  be  guilty 
of  perjury  before  high  Heaven,  if  I  voted  in  its  favor.  .... 
Even  if  the  judiciary  had  settled  the  qirestion,  I  should 

never  hold  myself  bound  by  their  decision I  shall 

never  consent  to  place  the  political  rights  and  liberties  of 
this  people  in  the  hands  of  any  judicial  tribunal."  * 

In  short,  he  would  exercise  his  own  judgment :  and 
tliis  is  precisely  what  I  intend  to  do  on  the  proposition 
to  hunt  slaves. 

Now  I  will  not  occupy  your  time,  nor  am  I  so  disposed 


■cibyGoogIc 


378  REPLY   TO   ASSAILANTS. 

at  this  niomentj  nor  does  the  occasion  recjuire  it,  hy  en- 
tering upon  any  minute  criticism  of  the  clause  in  the 
Constitution  touching  the  surrender  of  "fugitives  from 
service."  A  few  words  only  are  needful  Asauming,  Sir, 
in  the  face  of  commanding  rules  of  interpretation,  all 
leaning  towards  Freedom,  that,  in  the  evasive  language 
of  this  clause,  "  paltering  in  a  double  sense,"  the  words 
employed  can  be  judicially  regarded  as  justly  applicable 
to  fugitive  slaves,  which,  as  you  ought  to  know.  Sir,  is 
often  most  strenuously  and  conscientiously  denied,  thus 
sponging  the  whole  clause  out  of  existence,  except  as 
a  provision  for  the  return  of  persons  actually  bound  by 
lawfud.  contract,  hut  on  which  I  now  express  no  opin- 
ion,—  assuming,  I  say,  this  interpretation,  so  hostile  to 
Freedom,  and  derogatory  to  the  members  of  the  National 
Convention,  who  solemnly  declared  that  they  would  not 
give  any  sanction  to  Slavery,  or  admit  in  the  Consti- 
tution the  idea  that  there  could  be  property  in  men,  — 
assiuning,  I  repeat,  an  interpretation  which  everj-  prin- 
ciple of  the  Comirton  Law,  claimed  by  our  fathers  aa 
their  birthright,  must  disown,  —  admitting,  for  the  mo- 
ment only,  that  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States 
has  any  words  which  in  any  legal  intendment  can  con- 
strain fugitive  slaves,  —  then  I  desire  to  say,  that,  as  I 
understand  the  Constitution,  this  clause  does  not  im- 
pose upon  me,  as  Senator  or  citizen,  any  obligation  to 
take  part,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  the  surrender  of  a 
fugitive  slave. 

Sir,  as  Senator,  I  have  taken  at  your  desk  the  oath 
to  support  the  Constitution,  as  /  understand  it.  And 
understanding  it  as  I  do,  I  am  hound  by  that  oath,  Mr. 
President,  to  oppose  all  enaetments  by  Congress  on  the 
subject  of  fugitive  slaves,  as  a  ilagrant  violation  of  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


KEPLYTO  ASSAILANTS.  379 

Constitution;  especially  must  I  oppose  the  last  act, 
as  a  tyrannical  usurpation,  kindred  in  character  to  the 
Stamp  Act,  which  our  fathers  indignantly  refused  to 
obey.  Here  my  duties,  xuider  the  oath  which  I  have 
taken  as  Senator,  end.  There  is  nothing  heyond.  They 
are  all  absorbed,  in  the  constant,  inflexihle,  righteous 
obligation  to  oppose  every  exercise  by  Congress  of  any 
power  over  the  subject  In  no  respect  hy  that  oath 
can  I  be  compelled  to  duties  in  ofher  capaciiies,  or  as 
a  simple  diisen,  especially  when  revolting  to  my  con- 
science. Now  in  this  interpretation  of  the  Constitution 
I  may  he  wrong ;  others  may  differ  from  me ;  the  Sen- 
ator from  Virginia  may  be  otherwise  minded,  and  the 
Senator  from  South  Carolina  also ;  and  they  will,  each 
and  all,  act  according  to  their  respective  understand- 
ing. For  myself,  I  shall  act  according  to  mine.  On 
this  explicit  statement  of  my  constitutional  obligations 
I  stand,  as  upon  a  living  rock;  and  to  the  inquiry, 
in  whatever  form  addressed  to  my  personal  responsibil- 
ity, whether  I  would  aid,  directly  or  indirectly,  in  re- 
ducing or  surrendering  a  fellow-man  to  bondage,  I 
reply  again,  "  Is  thy  servant  a  dog,  that  he  should  do 
this  thing?" 

And,  Sir,  looking  round  upon  this  Senate,  I  might  ask 
fearlessly,  how  many  there  are,  even  in  this  body,  — 
if,  indeed,  there  be  a  single  Senator,  — who  would  stoop 
to  any  such  service  1  Until  some  one  rises  and  openly 
confesses  his  willingness  to  hecome  a  Slave-Hunter,  I 
will  not  helieve  there  can  be  one.  [Here  Mr.  Sumn&r 
paused,  but  nobody  rose.']  And  yet  honorable  and  chiv- 
a[ix)us  Senators  have  rushed  headlong  to  denounce  me 
hecause  I  openly  declared  my  repudiation  of  a  service 
at  which  every  manly  bosom  must  revolt.     "Siie,  I 


■cibyGoogIc 


380  REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS. 

have  found  in  Bayonne  good  citizens  and  brave  soldiera, 
hut  not  one  executioner,"  -was  tlie  noUe  utterance  of  the 
Governor  of  that  place  to  Chai-les  the  Ninth  of  France, 
m  response  to  the  royal  edict  for  the  massacre  of  St. 
Bartholomew ;'  and  such  a  spirit,  I  trust,  will  yet  ani- 
mate the  people  of  this  country,  when  pressed  to  the 
service  of  "  dogs." 

To  that  other  question  which  has  been  proposed, 
whether  Massachusetts,  by  State  laws,  will  carry  out  the 
offensive  clause  in  the  Constitution  accordmg  to  the  \in- 
derstaudhig  of  the  venerable  Senator  from  South  Caro- 
lina, I  reply,  that  Massachusetts,  at  all  times,  has  been 
ready  to  do  her  duty  under  the  Constitution,  as  she  un- 
derstands it,  and  I  doubt  not  will  ever  continue  of  this 
mind.     More  than  this  I  cannot  say. 

In  quittii^  this  topic,  I  cannot  forbear  to  remark  that 
the  assault  on  me  for  my  disclaimer  of  aE  constitutional 
obligation,  restii^  upon  me  as  Senator  or  citizen,  to  aid 
in  enslaving  a  fellow-man,  or  in  surrendering  him  to 
Slavery,  comes  with  ill  grace  from  the  veteran  Senator 
from  Virginia,  a  State  which,  by  its  far-famed  resolutions 
of  1798,  claimed  to  determme  its  constitutional  obUga- 
tions,  even  to  the  extent  of  openly  declaring  two  differ- 
ent Acts  of  Congress  null  and  void ;  and  it  comes  even 
more  strangely  from  the  venerable  Senator  from  South 
Carolina,  a  State  which,  in  latter  days,  has  arrayed  it- 
self openly  {gainst  the  national  autliorities,  and  which 
threatens  nulliiieation  as  often  as  babies  cry. 

Surely  the  Senator  from  South  Carolina,  with  his 
silver-white  locks,  would  have  hesitated  to  lead  this 
assault  upon  me,  had  he  not  for  the  moment  been  en- 
tirely oblivious  of  the  history  of  the  State  which  he 
1  SiBmondi,  Hiatoire  de  France,  Tom,  XIX.  p.  177,  note. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPLY   TO    ASSAILANTS.  381 

represents.  INot  many  years  have  passed  since  an  inoi- 
■  dent  occurred  at  Charleston,  in  South  Carolina,  —  not  at 
Boston,  in  Massachusetts,  —  which  ought  to  be  remem- 
bered. The  postmaster  of  that  place,  acting  under  a 
controlling  Public  Opinion  there,  informed  the  head  of 
his  Department  at  Washington  that  he  had  determined 
to  suppress  all  Antislave-n/  publications,  and  requested 
instructions  tor  the  future.  Thus,  in  violation  of  the 
laws  of  the  land,  the  very  mails  were  rifled,  and  South 
Carolina  smiled  approbation.  But  still  further.  The 
Postmaster-General,  Mr.  Kendall,  after  prudently  alleg- 
ing, that,  as  he  had  not  seen  the  papers  in  c[uestion,  he 
could  not  give  an  opinion  of  their  character,  proceeded 
to  say  that  he  bad  been  informed  that  they  were  inflam- 
matory, incendiary,  and  insurrectionary,  and  then  an- 
nounced :  — 

"  By  no  act  or  direction  of  mine,  official  or  private,  couM 
I  be  induced  to  aid  knowingly  in  giving  circulation  to  papers 
of  this  description,  directly  or  indirectly.  We  owe  an  ohliga- 
tion  to  the  laws,  but  a  higher  one  to  the  communities  in  which 
we  live ;  and  if  the  former  be  perverted  to  destroy  the  latter, 
*'(  is  patriotism  to  disregard  them.  Entertaining  these  views, 
I  cannot  sanction,  and  will  not  condemn,  the  step  you  have 
taken." ' 

Such  was  the  approvii^  response  of  the  National 
Government  to  the  Postmaster  of  Charleston,  wiien,  for 
the  sake  of  Slavery,  and  without  any  constitutional 
scruple,  he  set  himself  against  an  acknowledged  law  of 
the  land.  And  yet  the  venerable  Senator  from  South 
Carolina  now  presumes  to  denounce  me,  when,  for  the 
sake  of  Freedom,  and  in  the  honest  interpretation  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


382  EEPLY   TO  ASSAILANTS. 

my  constitutional  obligations,  I   decline  an  offensive 
service. 

There  is  another  incident  in  the  history  of  South  Car- 
olina, which,  as  a  loyal  son  of  Massachusetts,  I  cannot 
forget,  and  which  rises  now  in  judgment  against  the  ven- 
erable Senator.  Massachusetts  ventured  to  commission 
a  distinguished  gentleman,  of  blameless  life  and  emi- 
nent professional  qualities,  who  had  served  with  honor 
in  the  other  House  [Hon.  Samuel  Hoar],  to  reside  at 
Charleston  for  a  brief  period,  in  order  to  gitard  the  rights 
of  her  free  colored  citizens,  assailed  on  arrival  there  by 
an  inhospitable  statute,  so  gross  in  its  provisions  that 
an  eminent  character  of  South  Carolina,  a  Judge  of  the 
Supreme  Court  of  the  United  States  [Hon.  William 
Johkson],  had  condemned  it  as  "tramplir^  on  the 
Constitution,"  and  "  a  direct  attack  upon  the  sovereign- 
ty of  the  United  States."  ^  Massachusetts  had  read  in 
the  Constitution  a  clause  closely  associated  with  that 
touching  fugitives  from  service,  to  the  following  effect ; 
"  The  citizens  of  each  State  shall  be  entitled  to  all  priv- 
ileges and  immunities  of  citizens  in  tlie  several  States," 
and  supposed  that  this  would  yet  be  recognized  by 
South  CaroKna.  But  she  was  mistaken.  Her  venera- 
ble representative,  an  unarmed  old  man,  with  hair  as 
silver-white  almost  as  that  of  the  Senator  before  me, 
was  beset  in  Charleston  by  a  "  respectable "  mob,  pre- 
vented from  entering  upon  his  duties,  and  driven  from 
tlie  State,  —  while  the  Legislature  stepped  forward  to 
sanction  this  shameless,  lawless  act,  by  placing  on  the 
statute-book  an  order  for  his  expulsion.  And  yet.  Sir, 
the  excitable  Senator  from  South  Carolina  is  fired  by  tlie 

1  Latter  to  John  Qnincy  Adams,  July  3, 1824  ;  Opinion  in  Ei parte  Henry 
Elkison,  August  J,  1623:  Beport  No.  bO,  Com.  H.  of  E.,  27th  Cong.  1st  Sess, 
Jan.  20, 1S43,  Appendix,  pp.  14,  29. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPLY  TO   ASSAILAKTS.  ^tio 

fancied  delinq^uencies  of  Massacliusetts  towards  Slave- 
Hunters,  and  also  by  my  own  refusal  to  render  them 
any  aid  or  comfort ;  be  shoots  questions  in  volleys,  as- 
sumes to  measure  our  duties  hy  his  underatandmg,  and 
ejaculates  a  lecture  at  Maasaehuaetts  and  myself.  Sir,- 
before  that  venerable  Senator  again  ventures  thus,  let 
him  return  to  his  own  State,  seamed  aU  over  witli  the 
scars  of  Nullification,  and  first  lecture  there.  Ay,  Sir,  let 
him  look  into  Ms  own  heart,  and  lecture  himself 

But  enough  for  the  present  on  the  extent  of  my 
constitntioual  obligations  to  become  Slave  -  Hunter. 
There  are,  however,  yet  other  things  in  the  assault  of 
the  venerable  Senator,  which,  for  the  sake  of  truth,  in 
just  defence  of  Massachusetts,  and  in  honor  of  Freedom, 
shall  not  be  left  unanswered.  Alluding  to  those  days 
when  Massachusetts  was  illustrated  by  Otis,  Hancock, 
and  "  the  brace  of  Adamses,"  when  FaneuU  Hall  sent 
forth  notes  of  Liberty  which  resounded  even  to  South 
Carolina,  and  the  very  stones  in  the  streets  of  Boston 
rose  in  mutiny  against  tyranny,  the  Senator  with  the 
silver-white  locks,  in  the  very  ecstasy  of  Slavery,  broke 
forth  in  exclamation  that  Massachusetts  was  then 
"  slaveholding,"  and  he  presumed  to  hail  these  patriots 
representatives  of  "  hardy,  slaveholding  Massachusetts." 
Su:,  I  repel  the  imputation.  True,  Massachusetts  was 
"hardy" ;  but  she  was  not,  in  any  just  sense,  "slave- 
holding."  Had  she  been  so,  she  could  not  have  been 
"hardy."  The  two  characteristics  are  inconsistent  as 
wealoiess  and  strength,  as  disease  and  health,  —  I  had 
almost  said,  as  death  and  life. 

The  Senator  opens  a  page  on  which  I  willingly  dwell. 
Sir,  Slavery  never  flourished  in  Massachusetts;  nor. did 


■cibyGoogIc 


384  REPLY  TQ  ASSAILANTS. 

it  ever  prevail  there  at  any  time,  even  in  early  colonial 
days,  in  such  measure  aa  to  be  a  distinctive  feature  of 
her  progressive  civilization.  Her  few  slaves  were  for  a 
term  of  years  or  for  life.  If,  in  fact,  their  issue  was  some- 
times held  in  bondage,  it  was  never  by  sanction  of  any 
statute  or  law  of  Colony  or  Commonwealth.  Such  has 
been  the  solemn  and  repeated  judgment  of  her  Supreme 
Court.'  In  all  her  annals,  no  person  was  ever  bom  a 
slave  on  the  soil  of  Massachusetts.  This,  of  itself,  is  an 
answer  to  the  imputation  of  the  Senator. 

Benign  and  brilliant  Acts  of  her  Legislature,  at  an 
early  date,  show  her  sensibility  on  this  subject.  Un- 
happily, in  1645,  two  negroes  were  brought  from  the 
coast  of  Guinea  in  a  Boston  ship.  Instead  of  holding 
them  as  slaves,  the  record  shows  "a  resolve  to  send 
them  back."  ^  One  year  later,  "  a  negro  interpreter,  with 
others,  unlawfully  taken,"  hecame  the  occasion  of  an- 
other testimony.     Thus  spoke  Massachusetts:  — 

"  The  General  Ceurt,  conceiving  themselves  bound  by  the 
first  opportunity  to  bear  witness  against  the  heinous  and  cry- 
ing sill  of  man-stealing,  as  also  to  prescribe  such  timely  re- 
dress for  what  is  past,  and  mch  a  law  for  the  future,  as  may 
mfficienUy  deter  all  others  belonging  to  us  to  have  to  do  in  such 
vile  and  most  odious  courses,  Justly  abhorred  of  all  good  and 
fust  men,  do  order,  that  the  negro  interpreter,  with  others, 
unlawfully  taken,  be,  by  the  first  opportunity,  at  the  charge 
of  the  conntiy  for  present,  sent  to  his  native  country  of  Gui- 
nea, and  a  letter  with  him,  of  the  indignation  of  the  Court 
thereabouts,  and  justice  thereof"* 


2  MflBS.  Records,  Oct  14, 1845,  VoL  IIL  p.  49.   Winthrop,  History  of  Now 
Eiiglniid,  Vol.  IL  p  244. 
»  Ma33.  Records,  Not.  i,  16*8,  Vol,  IIL  p.  84. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAn^NTS.  385 

Kote  the  language :  "  Such,  vile  and  most  odious 
courses,  justly  abhorred  of  all  good  aud  juat  men."  Bet- 
ter words  could  not  be  employed  against  the  infamies  of 
Slavery  in  our  day.  The  Colony  that  could  issue  this 
noble  decree  was  inconsistent  with  itself,  when  it  per- 
mitted its  rocky  soil  to  be  pressed  by  the  footstep  of 
a  single  slave.  But  a  righteous  public  opinion  early 
and  constantly  set  its  face  against  Slavery,  As  early 
as  1701  the  following  vote  appears  on  the  Eecords  of 
Boston:  "The  Representatives  are  desked  to  promote 
the  encouraging  the  bringing  of  white  servants,  and  to 
put  a  period  to  negroes  ieing  slaves."  ^  Perhaps,  in  all 
history,  this  is  the  earliest  testimony  from  any  official 
body  against  Negro  Slavery,  and  I  thank  God  that  it 
came  from  Boston,  my  native  town.  In  1705  a  heavy 
duty  was  imposed  upon  every  negro  imported  into  the 
Province;*  in  1712  the  importation  of  Indians  as  ser- 
vants or  slaves  was  strictly  forbidden;^  b\it  the  gen- 
eral subject  of  Slavery  attracted  little  attention  till  the 
beginning  of  tlie  controversy  which  ended  in  the  Eevo- 
lution,  when  the  rights  of  the  blacks  were  blended  by- 
all  true  patriots  with  those  of  the  whites.  Sparing  un- 
necessary detail,  sufBce  it  to  say,  tliat,  as  early  as  1770, 
one  of  the  coiirts  of  Massachusetts,  anticipating  by  two 
years  the  renowned  judgment  in  Somerset's  case,  es- 
tablished within  its  jurisdiction  the  prmciple  of  eman- 
cipation, and,  under  its  touch  of  magic  power,  changed 
slave  into  freeman.  Similar  decisions  followed  from 
other  courts.    In  1776  the  whole  number  of  blacks,  botli 

1  Coll,  Mass,  Hist.  Soo.,  Sd  Ser.  Vol.  VIII.  p.  1S4.    Druke'a  History  and 
Antiquities  of  Boston,  p.  S25. 
a  Acts  and  Laws  of  tlie  Province  of  the  Maasaohusette  Bay,  170B,  Ch.  VI, 


■cibyGoogIc 


386  EEPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS. 

free  and  slave,  sprinkled  thinly  over  "hardy"  Massa- 
chusetts, was  five  thousand  two  hundred  and  forty-nine, 
being  to  the  whites  as  one  to  sixty-five,^ — while  in 
"  slaveholdiiig  ■"  South  Carolina  the  number  of  negro 
slaves  at  that  time  was.  not  far  from  one  hundred  thou- 
sand, being  at  least  one  slave  for  every  freeman,  thus 
rendering  that  Colony  anythmg  but  "  hardy."  In  these 
figures  I  give  South  Carolina  the  benefit  of  the  most 
favorable  estimates.  Good  authorities  make  the  slaves 
at  that  time  in  this  State  more  than  twice  as  numer- 
ous as  the  freemen.^  At  last,  in  1Y80,  even  before  the 
triumph  of  Yorktown  led  the  way  to  that  peace  which 
set  its  seal  upon  National  Independence,  Massachu- 
setts, glowing  with  the  struggles  of  the  Revolution,  and 
iilled  with  the  sentiments  of  Freedom,  placed  foremost 
in  her  Declaration  of  Eights  those  emphatic  words, 
"  All  men  are  bom  free  and  equal,"  and  by  this  decla- 
ration exterminated  every  vestige  of  Slavery  within  her 
borders.  All  liail,  then,  to  Massachusetts !  the  just  and 
generous  Commonwealth  in  whose  behalf  I  have  the 
honor  to  speak. 

Thus,  Sir,  does  the  venerable  Senator  err,  when  he 
presumes  to  vouch  Massachusetts  for  Slavery,  and  to 
associate  this  odious  institution  with  the  names  of  her 
great  patriots. 

But  the  venerable  Senator  errs  yet  more,  if  possible, 
when  he  attributes  to  "  slaveholding "  communities  a 
leading  part  in  those  contributions  of  arms  and  treasure 
by  which    independence   was   secured.     Here   are   his 

1  Coll.  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.,  Vol.  IV.  p.  198. 

2  Hewntt,  History  of  South  Carolina,  Vol.  II.  p.  2S2;  Drayton,  View  of 
Sonth  Caralina,  p.  103:  Mills,  Statistics  of  Sonth  Carolina,  p.  177.  In  har- 
mony with  these  is  the  recent  Hiatory  of  South  Carolina,  by  William  Gil- 
more  Sinuos,  (ed.  ISeO,)  p.  199. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  387 

exact  words,  as  I  find  theia  in  the  "Globe,"  revised  by 
Jiimself. 

"  Sir,  when  blood  was  shed  upon  the  plains  of  Lexington 
and  Concord,  in  an  issue  made  by  Boston,  to  whom  was  an 
appeal  made,  and  from  whom  was  it  answered^  The  answer 
is  found  m  the  a«ts  of  slaveholding  States,  —  animis  opibus- 
que  parati.  Yes,  Sir,  the  independence  of  America,  to  main- 
tain republican  liberty,  was  won  by  the  arms  and  tre^ure, 
by  the  patriotism  and  good  faith,  of  slaveholding  communi- 
ties." ' 

Observe,  Sir,  tlie  words  as  emphasized  by  himself. 
Surely,  the  Senator,  with  his  silver-white  locks,  all  fresh 
from  the  outrage  of  the  Nebraska  EUl,  and  that  over- 
throw of  a  solemn  compact,  camiot  stand  here  and 
proclaim  the  "  good  faith  of  slaveholding  communities," 
except  in  irony,  —  yes.  Sir,  in  irony.  And  let  me  add, 
tliat,  when  this  Senator  presumes  to  say  that  American 
Independence  "was  won  by  the  arms  and  treasure  of 
slaveholding  communities,"  he  speaks  either  in  irony  or 
in  Ignorance 

The  question  which  the  ^  enerable  Senator  from  South 
Catohoi  opens  by  his  \amt  I  have  no  desire  to  dis- 
cuss but  since  it  i  pieseiited,  I  confront  it  at  once. 
This  IS  not  the  fir^t  time  during  my  brief  service  here, 
th^t  this  Sei  itoi  has  sought  on  this  floor  to  provoke 
eomjanson  between  sla\el  olding  communities  and  the 
Piee  States 

Mr  Butler  [  />  mh  t  e  t\  You  cannot  quote  a  single 
inati  ce  i  wh  cl  I  hue  dene  it.  I  have  always  said  I 
tho  i^ht  t  WIS  m  1  id  taste  -uid  I  have  never  attempted  it. 

1  Cong  e     0       (.1  be  Co  ;,   1  t  Sess,,  Juno  3fi,  18&4,  Vol.  XXVIIL 


■cibyGoogIc 


■386  EEPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS, 

aiR.  SuMKER.  I  beg  the  Senator's  pardon.  I  always 
listen  to  him,  and  I  know  whereof  I  aiHrni.  He  haa 
pixjfusely  dealt  in  it.  I  allude  now  only  to  a  single 
occasion.  In  his  speech  on  the  Nebraska  Bill,  run- 
ning through  two  days,  it  was  one  of  his  commonplaces. 
There  he  openly  presented  a  contrast  between  the  Free 
States  and  "  slaveholding  communities  "  in  cer'tain  essen- 
tial features  of  civilization,  and  directed  shafts  at  Mas- 
sachusetts which  called  to  his  feet  my  distinguished 
colleague  at  tlrnt  time  [Mr.  Eterett],  and  more  than 
once  compelled  me  to  take  the  floor.  And  now.  Sir,  the 
venerable  Senator,  not  rising  from  his  seat  and  standing 
openly  before  the  Senate,  nndertalies  to  deny  that  he 
has  dealt  in  such  comparisons. 

Mr.  Butler.     Will  the  Senator  allow  me  t 

Mr,  Sdmneh.     Certainly:  I  yield  the  floor  to  the  Senator. 

Mb.  Butlbh.  Whenever  that  speech  is  read,  —  and  I 
wish  the  Senator  had  read  it  before  he  commented  on  it 
with  a  good  deal  of  rhetorical  enthusiasm, —  it  will  be  found 
that  I  was  particular  not  to  wound  the  feeUngs  of  the  North- 
em  people  who  were  sympathizing  with  us  in  the  great 
movement  to  remove  odious  distinctions.  I  was  careful  to 
say  nothing  that  would  provoke  invidious  comparisons ;  and 
when  that  speech  is  read,  notwithstanding  the  vehement  .in- 
sertion of  the  honorable  Senator,  he  will  find,  that,  when  I 
quoted  the  laws  of  Massachusetts,  particularly  one  Act  which 
I  termed  the  Toties  Quoties  Act,  by  which  every  negro  was 
whipped  every  time  he  came  into  Massachusetts,  I  quoted 
them  with  a  view  to  show,  not  a  contrast  between  South 
Carolina  and  Massachusetts,  but  te  show  tliat  in  the  whole 
of  this  country,  from  the  beginning  to  this  time,  — ■  even  in 
my  own  State,  —  I  made  no  exception,. —  public  opinion  had 
undergone  a  change,  and  that  it  had  undergone  the  same 
change  in  Massachusetts ;  for  at  one  time  they  did  not  re- 


■cibyGooglc 


REPLY  TO   ASSAILAXTS.  diiy 

gard  tills  institution  of  Slavery  with  the  same  odium  that 
they  do  at  this  time.  That  was  the  purpose ;  and  I  chal- 
lenge the  Senator,  as  an  orator  of  fairness,  to  look  at  it  and 
see  if  it  is  not  so, 

Mb.  Sumkek.     Has  the  Senator  dono  1 

Mr.  Butler,  I  may  not  be  done  presently;  but  that  is 
the  purport  of  that  speech. 

Mr.  Sumnee.  Will  the  Senator  refer  to  his  own 
speech  ?  He  now  admits,  that,  under  the  guise  of  an 
aiguraent,  he  did  draw  attention  to  what  lie  evidently 
regarded  an  odious  law  of  Massachusetts.  And,  Sir,  I 
did  not  forget,  that,  in  doing  Uiis,  there  was,  at  the  time, 
an  apology  which  ill  concealed  the  sting>    But  let  that 

1  The  following,  from  the  Oms^esaonal  Glvbe  (S3d  Cong.  1st  Sesa.,  Ap- 
pendix, p.  234),  wilUhow  thaspirit  ofMr.  Bntler'a  remarks,  on  the  ooeasion 
referred  to. 

"  Mr.  Butler I  hays  said,  that,  before  tlie  iidoption  of  tlie  Mia- 

Bonri  Compromise,  even  the  Northern  Stales  were  not  so  very  liind  and 
philanthropic  towards  this  raoo,  which  Is  now  nnder  the  peculiar  care  of 
the  Senator  iVom  Massachusetts,  as  ha  would  represent.  I  have  before  me 
a  statute  of  that  State,  which.  I  ask  my  friend  th>m  Alabama  [Mr.  C.  C. 
Clay],  who  sits  beside  me,  to  read." 

[Here  Mr.  Clay  read  tmia  the  Act  in  qaestion  (witiholding  the  title,  "  An 
Act  far  lapprtssing  taid  paaiitiiig  of  Boguet,  Vagoiondi,  Omaaon  Beggars, 
awiorter  Me,  DUorderly.  imd  Lead  Ptriona"}  a  section  prohibiting  the  tar- 
rying of  vagrant  negmes  in  the  State  hnger  ihna  lio)  mmllui,  on  pain,  in  case 
of  complaint,  and  ooiitinuanoa  aftar  dna  wnminjc,  of  being  "  whipped  not 
CKceediiig  ten  stripes,  and  ordered  to  depart  out  of  the  Coirimonwealth  within 
ten  days;  and  if  he  or  she  shall  not  so  depart,  the  same  process  to  be  had 
and  punishment  inflioted,  and  so  lotiti  guotiei."] 

"  Mr.  Broadhead.    Wliat  is  the  date  of  that  statute  ? 

"Mb.  Bdtlbr.  Seventeen  hundred  and  eighty-eighti  and  it  remained 
on  Hie  statute-book  infidlfvrce  until  1823,  until  at^er  the  adoption  of  the 
Missonri  Compromise.  I  will  call  it  the  Totiet  (bwliet  Act.  The  negroes 
were  to  be  whipped  every  time  they  happened  to  get  to  Boston,  or  any  other 
pkcB  in  Massachusetts.     That  is  a  specimen  of  statutoiy  philanthropy  at 

To  this  Mr.  Sumner  replied  at  ouce :  — 


;db,Googlc 


390  EEPLY  TO   ASSAILANTS. 

pass.  The  Senator  is  strangely  oMvioiis  of  the  statis- 
tical contrasts  which  he  borrowed  from  the  speech  of  a 
member  of  the  other  House,  and  which,  at  his  req^uest, 
were  read  by  a  Senator  before  him  on  tliis  floor.  The 
Senator,  too,  is  sti-angely  oblivious  of  yet  another  impu- 
tation, which,  at  the  very  close  of  his  speech,  he  shot  as 
a  Parthian  arrow  at  Massachusetts,  It  is  lie,  then,  who 
is  the  offender ;  and  no  hardihood  of  denial  can  extricate 
him.  For  myself.  Sir,  I  understand  the  sensibilities  of 
Senators  from  "  siaveholding  communities,"  and  would 
not  wound  them  by  a  superfluous  word.  Of  Slavery  I 
speak  strongly,  as  I  must ;  but  thus  far,  even  at  the 
expense  of  my  ailment,  I  have  avoided  the  contrasts 
founded  on  detail  of  %ures  and  facts  which  are  so  ob- 
vious between  the  Free  States  and  "  siaveholding  com- 

"  The  Senator  from  South  Cnrolina  is  so  jealoua  of  the  honor  of  hia  oira 
Stnte,  that  he  will  pardon  me.  if  I  iiitamipt  him  for  one  moment,  merely  to 
explain  the  offensive  sWtute  to  which  ha  has  referred.  I  have  nothing  to  say 
in  vindication  of  it:  I  simply  desire  that  it  should  be  understood.  This  stat- 
ute, which  bears  date  1T89,  anterior  to  the  National  Government,  n-aa  ap- 
plioal)le  only  to  Africans  or  negroes  not  citizens  of  some  one  of  tlia  United 
States ;  and,  according  to  oontemportiry  evidence,  it  was  intended  to  protect 
the  Commonwaalth  against  the  vngabondaga  of  fugitive  slaves.  But  I  do 
notvindicflte  the  statute  1  I  only  explain  it;  and  I  add,  that  it  has  long  shioB 
been  hanished  from  the  statuts-book." 

There  is  a  Report  to  the  Massachusetts  Legislature  by  Theodore  Lyman. 
Jr.,  as  Chairman  of  a  Committee  "  to  report  a  Bill  concerning  the  Admis- 
sion Into  this  State  of  Fi-ee  Negroes  and  MuUittoes,"  dated  January  18, 1822, 
which  confirms  the  position  of  Mr.  Svuniier.  Aft«c  a  few  preliminary  re- 
marks, it  is  said :  — 

"  The  Committee  have  already  fonnd  in  the  statute-hoolts  of  this  Com- 
monwealth a  law,  passed  in  1788,  ragulathig  the  residence  In  this  Stale  of 
certain  persons  of  color.  They  believe  that  ffiii  law  hag  never  been  enfm-ced, 
and,  ineffectual  as  it  has  proved,  they  would  never  have  been  the  authors  of 
placing  among  the  statutes  a  Uw  so  arbitrary  in  its  principle,  and  in  its 
operation  to  iMe  Bceordast  viiih  the  intUtaiium,  feelings,  and  jn-acUces  of  Ihe 
pcophoftka  OmBUBoeeallli." 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  391 

munities "  ;  especially  liave  I  shunned  all  allusion  to 
South  Carolina.  But  the  venerable  Senator  to  whose 
discretion  that  State  has  intrusted  its  interests  here  will 
not  allow  me  to  he  still. 

God  forbid  that  I  should  do  injustice  to  South  Caro- 
lina !  I  know  well  the  gallantly  of  many  of  her  sons. 
I  know  the  response  which  she  made  to  the  appeal  of 
Maaaachusetts  for  union  against  the  Stamp  Act  —  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Act  of  tliat  day^ — by  the  pen  of  Chris- 
topher Gadsden.  And  I  remember  with  soitow  that  this 
patriot  was  obliged  to  confess,  at  the  time,  her  "weak- 
ness in  having  such  a  number  of  slaves,"  though  it  is 
to  his  credit  that  he  recc^ized  Slavery  as  "  crime."  ^ 
I  have  no  pleasure  in  dwelling  on  the  humiliations  of 

The  Beport  then  goes  hito  a  hEetoiy  of  the  pubHo  sets  and  proceedings  in 
relation  to  colored  parsons  in  Massnohnsetts,  from  the  earliest  colonial  times 
down  t»  tha  date  of  the  enactment,  in  order  to  slioiv  the  spirit  of  the  people 
towards  this  class,  and  concludes  with  ohservations  like  the  following;  — 

"  The  feelings  of  tlie  people  disclosed  since  the  year  1T60  m  the  votes  of 
towns  and  in  the  verdicts  of  juries,  ....  the  fnct  tliat  there  is  no  law  nt 
present  in  force  which  makes  a  dialinotion  between  white  nnd  blaclc  per- 
sons, ....  the  same  law  which  allows  justices  to  expel  blacks  from  the 
State  after  a  certnin  notice  aspressly  recogrizing  the  right  of  blacks  to  be- 
come citizens  (a  law,  the  conatltationality  of  which  has  been  called  in  ques- 
tion, and  which  it  Is  well  known  was  passed  on  the  same  day  as  the  Aboli- 
tion Act  of  March,  1788,  in  order  to  prevent  the  Slato  ftom  being  overrun 
with  mnawav  slaves),— blacks  having  the  same  public  provisions  for  educa- 
doii,  and  the'same  public  support  in  case  of  sickness  and  poverty,— many 
blacks  before  and  during  the  Revolution  having  obtained  their  freedom  by  a 
legal  process,  and,  as  the  spirit  of  the  Constitution  of  tills  State  abrogates 
all  exclusive  laws,  thereby  becoming  invested  with  all  the  rights  of  tVeemen, 

and  with  a  capability  of  becoming  fi'eeholders and,  above  all,  the 

constmctlon  given  to  the  first  principle  in  the  Declaration  of  Rights  at  tha 
time  of  the  adopSon  of  this  Constitution,  both  in  the  public  mind  and  in  tha 
courts  of  law,  — clearly  manifest  and  demonstrate  that  tlie  people  of  this 
Commonwealth  have  always  believed  negroes  and  mnlnttoes  to  possess  tha 
same  right  and  oapnbility  to  become  citizens  as  white  persons." 

1  Bancroft,  History  of  the  United  States,  Vol.  V.  pp.  394,  426,  438- 


■cibyGoogIc 


392  REPLY   TO    ASSAILANTS. 

South  Carolina ;  I  have  Bttle  desire  to  expose  her  sores ; 
I  would  not  lay  bare  even  her  nakedness.  But  tlie 
Senator,  in  his  vaunt  for  "  slaveholdlng  communities," 
has  made  a  claim  for  Slavery  so  derogatory  to  Freedom, 
and  30  inconsistent  with  history,  tliat  I  cannot  allow 
it  to  pass  unanswered. 

This,  Sir,  is  not  the  iirst  time,  even  during  my  little 
experience  here,  that  the  same  claim  has  been  made  on 
this  floor ;  and  this  seems  the  more  astonishing,  because 
the  archives  of  the  country  furnish  such  ample  and  un- 
doubted materials  for  its  refutation,  Tbe  c|uestion  of 
the  comparative  contributions  of  men  by  different  State.s 
and  sections  of  the  country  m  the  war  of  the  Revolu- 
tion was  broiight  forward  as  early  as  1790,  in  the  first 
Congress  under  the  Constitution,  in  the  animated  and 
protracted  debate  on  the  .assumptiou  of  State  debts  by 
the  Union.  On  that  occasion,  Fisher  Ames,  a  Repre- 
sentative from  Massachusetts,  famous  for  classic  elo- 
quence, moved  a  call  upon  the  "War  Department  for  the 
number  of  men  furnished  by  each  State  to  the  Kevo- 
lutionary  armies.  The  motion,  though  vehemently  op- 
posed, was  carried  by  a  smaU,  majority.  Shortly  after- 
wards an  answer  to  the  call  was  received  from  tbe 
Department,  at  that  time  imder  the  chaise  of  General 
Knox.  This  answer,  wliich  is  one  of  the  documents  of 
our  history,  places  beyond  cavil  or  criticism  the  exact 
contributions  in  arms  made  by  each  State.  Here  it  is,  — 
taken  from  the  original,  in  a  volume  of  the  "  American 
State  Papers,"  ^  pubhsbed  under  the  authority  of  Con- 
gress.    This  is  of&oial. 

1  MilLtiLty  Affali's,  Vol.  L  pp.  U-IS.  Comp.ive  with  ColL  New  HHmp. 
Hist  Soc,  Vol.  I.  p.  338. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPLY  TO   ASSAILANTS. 


Stateinmt  of  tlie  number  of  troops  and  militia  furnished  hy  the 

several  States,  fo 

r  the  mppiyrt  of  the  Bevolidionary  War,  from 

1775  to  1783,  indvsive. 

Number  of 

Numher  of 

Total  mlUtta 

Conlectoral 

NoKTHERN  States. 

"T™™" 

" 

troupB. 

Kew  Hampsliire 

12,496 

2,093 

14,589 

3,700 

MasaacliuseUa 

67,eo7 

15,155 

83,062 

0,500 

Khode  Island 

5,908 

4,284 

10,192 

1,500 

Conneetieut 

32,0S9 

7,782 

89,831 

3,000 

New  York 

17,781 

8,813 

21,093 

8,750 

PennaylTania 

25,608 

7,357 

32,965 

2,000 

New  Jersey 

10,726 

6,055 

16,781 

2,500 

Total 

172,465 

46,048 

218,513 

80,950 

SoBTHBRN  States. 

Delaware 

2,887 

376 

2,763 

1,000 

Maryland 

13,912 

5,464 

19,373 

4,000 

Virginia 

26,878 

4,163 

30,841 

21,880 

North  Carolina 

7,263 

2,706 

12,000 

South  Carolina 

6,417 

. 

6,417 

25,850 

Georgia 

2,679 



2,679 

9,900 

Total 

£9,336 

12,709 

72,045 

74,630 

At  this  time  there  was  but  little  difference  in  num- 
bers between  the  population  of  the  Southern  States  and 
that  of  the  Northern  States.  By  the  census  of  1790 
the  Southern  had  a  population  of  1,851,804  ;  the  North- 
ern a  population  of  1,882,615.  Notmthstanding  this 
essential  equality  of  population  in  the  two  sections,  the 
North  furnished  vastly  more  men  than  the  South. 

Of  continental  troops,  the  Southern  States  furnished 
59,336;  the  Northern,  172,465:  making  about  three 
men  furnished  to  the  continental  army  by  the  Northern 
States  to  one  from  the  Southern, 

Of  militia  whose  services  are  authenticated  by  the 
War  Office,  the  Southern  States  furnished  12,709 ;  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


S94  REPLY   TO    ASSAILANTS. 

Northern,  46,048  :  making  nearly  four  men  contributed 
to  the  militia  by  the  Northern  States  to  one  from  the 
Southern. 

Of  militia  whose  services  are  not  authenticated  by 
the  War  Ofdce,  hut  are  set  down  in  the  return  as  "  con- 
jectural "  only,  we  have  74,630  furnished  by  the  South- 
ern States,  and  30,950  by  the  Northern :  maldng,  under 
this  head,  five  men  contributed  by  the  Southern  to  two 
from  the  Northern.  The  chief  services  of  the  Southern 
States,  for  -which  the  venerable  Senator  now  claims  so 
much,  it  will  be  observed  with  a  smile,  were  conjechi- 
rai  only. 

Looking,  however,  at  the  sura-total  of  continental 
troops,  authenticated  mihtia,  and  "  conjectural "  militia, 
we  have  146,675  from  the  Southern  States,  while  249,463 
were  from  the  Northern :  raakuig  upwards  of  100,000 
men  contributed  to  the  war  by  the  Northern  more  than 
by  the  Southern, 

The  disparity  swells,  when  we  compare  South  Carolina 
and  Massachusetts  directly.  Of  continental  troops  and 
authenticated  militia  and  "  conjectural "  militia,  South 
Carolina  furnished  32,267,  while  Massachusetts  fur- 
nished 92,562  :  making  nearly  three  for  every  one  fur- 
nished by  South  Carolina.  Looli,  however,  at  the  conti- 
nental troops  and  tlie  authenticated  mihtia  from  the  two 
States,  and  here  you  wUl  find  only  6,417  furnished  by 
South  Carolina,  while  83,062  were  furnished  by  Massa- 
chusetts,— iem(f  thirteen  times  Tiiore  than  %  SotUh  Car- 
olina, and  much  more  than  hy  all  the  Southern  States 
togetlier.  Here  are  facts  and  figures  of  which  the  Sen- 
ator ought  not  to  be  ignorant. 

So  obvious  was  this  at  the  time,  that  we  find  John 
Adams  recording  in  his  Autobiography,  that  "  almost  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  395 

whole  army  was  derived  from  Kew  England."  ^  General 
Knox,  in  a  letter  to  Colonel  Joseph  Ward,  of  Massachu- 
setts, under  date  of  July  28,  1780,  with  regard  to  the 
reestablishment  of  the  aiiny,  has  a  few  words  in  point. 
After  complaining  of  the  general  inertness,  as  sufficient 
"  to  induce  a  ready  belief  that  tJie  mass  of  America  have 
taken  a  mcmsirotm  deal  of  opki/m,"  he  says :  — 

"It  is  true,  the  Eastern  States  and  New  York  have  done 
something  in  this  instance,  but  no  others.  Propagate  this 
truth."  * 

In  a  letter  to  General  Gates,  under  date  of  Philadel- 
phia, March  23,  1776,  John  Adams  touches  a  difference 
in  sentiment  between  the  ISTorthern  and  Southern  States, 
which  of  itself  accounts  for  this  disparity  of  military 
contributions. 

"  However,  my  dear  friend  Gates,  all  our  misfortunes  arise 
from  a  single  source,  ilie  reluctance  of  the  Southern  Colonies 
to  repuhlican  government."  ' 

Nothing  could  be  stronger,  although  it  is  painful  to 
think  t!iat  it  was  true. 

Fore^n  testimony,  also,  is  in  harmony  with  the  offi- 
cial Statement. "  The  Marquis  de  Chastellux,  who  trav- 
elled through  the  States  towards  the  close  of  the  Rev- 
olution, records  somewhere  that  he  "never  met  any- 
body from  the  North  who  had  not  been  in  the  army." 
So  marked  and  preeminent  was  the  service  of  the 
Northern  States,  ay.  Sir,  so  pecuKar  and  special  was 
the  service  of  Boston,  from  which  comes  the  present 
petition,  that  the  Eevolution  was  known  in  Europe 
by  the  name  of  this  patriotic  town.     Edmund  Burke 

1  Works,  Vol.  Iir.  p.  *8;  see  also  p.  SJ. 
^  Jackson's  History  of  N«wton,  p.  517. 
a  WorkB,  Vol.  I.  p.  207. 


■cibyGoogIc 


39G  EEPLY    TO    ASSAILANTS. 

exclaimed  in  Parliament;  "Tlie  cause  of  Boston  is  be- 
come the  cause  of  all  America.  Every  part  of  Amer- 
ica is  united  in  support  of  Boston.  By  these  acts  of 
oppression  you  have  made  Boston  the  Lord  Mayor  of 
America." '  And  it  was  the  same  on  the  Continent. 
Our  fathers  in  arms  for  Independence  were  known  as 
"  the  insurgents  of  Boston."  The  French  King  was 
praised  for  protecting  with  his  arms  what  was  called 
"  the  justice  of  the  Bostoniana."  ^  In  saying  this,  I  do 
not  speali  vt^iely  or  without  authority. 

Did  occasion  require,  I  might  go  further,  and  minutely 
portray  the  imbecility  of  Southern ,  States,  and  particu- 
larly of  Soiith  Carolina,  in  the  War  of  the  Eevolution, 
as  compared  with  Northern  States.  This  is  a  sad  chap- 
ter, upon  which  I  dwell  unwillingly.  Faithful  annals 
record,  that,  as  early  as  1778,  the  six  South  Carolina 
regiments,  composing,  with  the  Georgia  regiment,  the 
Tegular  force  of  the  Southern  Department,  did  not,  in 
tlie  whole,  muster  above  eight  hundred  men ;  nor  was 
it  possible  to  fiU  "up  their  ranks.  The  succeeding  year, 
the  Governor  of  South  Carolina,  pressed  by  British 
forces,  offered  to  stipulate  the  neutrality  of  his  State 
during  the  war,  leaving  its  permanent  position  to  be 
decided  at  the  peace :  a  premonitory  symptom  of  the 
secession  menaced  in  our  own  day.  After  the  fatal 
field  of  Camden,  no  organized  American  force  was  left 
in  this  r^on.  The  three  Soutliem  States  —  animis  opi- 
hisque  parati,  according  to  the  vaunt  of  tlie  Senator — 

1  Hansard,  PadiBinentary  History,  Vol.  XVIQ.  col.  45. 

3  Vie  Pnblique  et  Priv^e  de  Louis  XVI-.  p.  43,  See  nlso  Memoir  of  the 
Eight  Honorable  Hu^h  Elliot,  hy  (he  Countess  of  Minto,  pubibhed  since 
this  speech,  where  will  be  found  {p.  48)  a  letter  ftom  a  fine  Indy  of  Vienna, 
who,  wrilinff  to  Mr.  Elliot  in  1T76,  confesses  that  she  has  been  "  Bostonion 
at  heart":  J'M 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY    TO   ASSAILANTS.  397 

had  not  a  single  battalion  iu  the  field.  During  all  this 
■  period  the  men  of  MassachiBetta  were  serving  their 
country,  not  at  home,  hut  away  from  their  own  herders : 
for,  from  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  Massachusetts 
never  felt  the  pressure  of  a  hostile  foot. 

The  offer  of  the  Governor  of  South  Carolina  to  stipu- 
late the  neutrality  of  liis  State  during  tlie  war  has  heen 
sometimes  called  in  question.  But,  unhappily,  the  case  is 
too  clear.  General  Moultrie,  who  commanded  at  Charles- 
ton, under  the  Governor,  and  whose  name  has  been  since 
given  to  one  of  the  forts  in  the  harbor  there,  has  fur- 
nished an  authentic  record  in  two  volumes,  entitled 
"Memoirs  of  the  American  Eevolution,  so  far  as  it  relat- 
ed to  the  States  of  North  and  South  Cai-olina  and  Geor- 
gia." He  is  my  witness.  As  the  Britisli  approached,  the 
Governor  and  his  Council  hecame  frightened,  and  pro- 
ceeded forthwitli  to  talk  about  capitulation.  At  last, 
after  debate,  "  the  question  was  carried  for  givii^  up  the 
town  upon  a  neutrality."  ^  Colonel  John  Laurens  was 
requested  to  caiTy  this  offer  of  capitulation  from  the 
Governor  to  General  Prevost,  the  British  commander; 
but  "  he  begged  to  be  excused  from  carrying  such  a 
mess^e ;  that  it  was  much  against  his  incHnation ;  that 
he  would  do  anything  to  serve  his  country,  but  he  could 
not  tliink  of  carrying  such  a  message  as  that."  Other 
envoys  were  fomid  who  most  reluctantly  undertook  this 
service.     The  message  was  as  follows :  — 

"To  propose  a  neutrality  during  the  war  between  Great 
Britain  and  America,  and  the  question,  whether  the  State  shall 
bekmff  to  Great  Britain  or  remam  one  of  the  United  States,  be 
determined  by  the  treaty  of  peace  between  those  two  pow- 
ers,"^ 
'  Moultrie,  Memoirs,  Vol,  I.  p.  4S3.  *  Ibid.,  p.  433. 


■cibyGoogIc 


398  EEPLY   TO   ASSAILANTS. 

The  same  story  is  told  by  others.  Eamsay,  himself 
of  South  Carolina,  in  his  "  History  of  the  American 
Eevolution,"  says. — 

"Commissioners  from  the  ganison  were  inatruoted  'to 
prop<«e  a  neutiakty  durmg  the  war  between  Great  Britain 
and  America,  and  that  the  question,  wJietlier  the  State  shall 
belong  to  (heat  Bntaui  or  remain  one  of  the  United  States,  be 
determined  by  the  treaty  of  peace  between  these  powers.' "  * 

Chief  Justice  Marshall,  in  his  authentic  work,  thus 
chronicles  the  disgiaceful  business :  — 

"  The  town  was  summoned  to  surrender,  and  the  day  was 
spent  in  sending  and  receiving  flags.  The  neutrality  of 
South  Carolina  during  the  war,  leaving  the  question,  whether 
that  State  should  finally  belong  to  Great  Britain  or  the  United 
States,  to  be  settled  in  the  treaty  of  peace,  was  proposed  by 
the  garrison,  and  rejected  by  Prevost."  ^ 

It  is  also  presented  with  precision  by  Professor  Bowen, 
of  Harvard  University,  in  his  recent  Life  of  General 
Lincoln,  who  remarks  on  it  as  follows  i  — 

"  This  proposal  did  not  come  merely  from  the  commander 
of  a  militfli'y  garrison,  in  which  case,  of  course,  it  would 
have  been  only  nugatory ;  the  Governor  of  the  State,  clothed 
with  discretionary  powera,  was  in  the  place,  and  probably 
moat  of  his  Council  along  with  him.  Whether  such  a  propo- 
sition would  have  been  justifiable  under  any  circumstances 
is  a  question  that  needs  not  be  discussed ;  at  any  rate,  it 
would  not  have  evinced  much  honorable  or  patriotic  feeling. 
But  to  make  such  an  offer  in  the  present  ease  was  conduct 
little  short  of  treason."  * 

1  History  of  the  AmerioHn  Revolution,  Vol.  II.  p.  118. 
i  Life  of  Wasliiiigton,  Vol.  I.  {ad  edition)  pp.  298,  299. 
8  Life  of  BeiyHiain  Linoolni  Sparks'*  AmerioaD  Biogropliy,  2il  Ser.  Vol, 
XIII.  p.  286. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  399 

This  author  concludes  an  animated  review  of  tlie 
proposition  with  the  remark,  that  it  "  was  equivalent  to 
an  offer  from  the  State  to  return  to  its  allegiance  to  the 
British  Crown,"  ^ 

The  fate  of  the  State  was  typified  in  the  capture  by 
the  British,  some  time  afterwards,  of  the  ship  "  Sontli 
Carolina,"  of  forty  gi.ms,  the  lai^est  and  most  costly  of 
our  infant  navy,  and  called  hy  Cooper  "  much  the  heavi- 
est ship  that  ever  sailed  Tuider  the  American  flag,  until 
the  new  frigates  were  constructed  during  the  War  of 
1812."^  But  here  is  the  same  story.  Her  service  was 
altogether  inadequate. 

At  last,  the  military  genius  and  remarlcable  exertions 
of  General  Greene,  a  Northern  man,  who  assumed  the 
command  of  the  Southern  army,  prevailed  in  rescuing 
South  Carolina  from  British  power.  But  the  trials  of 
this  successful  leader  reveal  in  a  striking  manner  the 
weakness  of  the  "  slaveholding  "  State  he  saved.  Some 
of  these  are  gi'aphically  presented  in  his  letters, 

Writing  to  President  Keed,  of  Pennsylvania,  under 
date  of  4th  May,  1781,  he  says:  — 

"  The  strength  and  resources  of  these  [Southern]  States 
to  support  the  war  have  been  greatly  magnified  and  over- 
rated; and  those  whose  business  and  true  interest  it  was  to 
give  a  just  state  of  the  situation  of  things  have  joined  in  the 
deception,  and,  from  a  false  principle  of  pride  of  having  the 
country  thought  powerful,  have  led  people  to  believe  it  was 
so.  It  is  true,  there  were  many  inhabitants,  but  they  were 
spread  over  a  groat  extent  of  country,  and  near  equally  di- 
vided between  the  King's  interest  and  ours.     The  majority 

1  Life  of  Benjamin  Lincoln:  Sparks's  Amerioiin  Biography,  !d  Ser.  Vol. 
XIH.  p.  286. 

2  History  of  the  HftTy  of  the  United  States  (2d  edition),  Vol.  I.  p.  213. 


■cibyGoogIc 


400  REPLY   TO   ASSAILAJJTS. 

is  greatly  in  favor  of  the  enemj  s  uiteie&t  now,  as  great 
numbers  of  the  Whigs  have  left  tlie  country  .  .  .  The 
love  of  pleasure  and  the  want  of  punciple  among  many  of 
those  who  are  our  friends  reudei  the  L.\eitions  very  languid 
in  support  of  our  cause,  and  unle&a  the  jfort/tati  Slates  can 
give  more  effectual  gwppwt,  these  States  miisf  fall  '  ^ 

Writing  to  Colonel  Di\ie  \inlei  dite  of  23d  May, 
1781,  General  Greene  a^aui  c\]jjbes  the  actual  condi- 
tion of  the  country. 

"  The  animosity  between  the  Whigs  and  Tones  of  this 
State  renders  their  situation  tiulj  dtplorible  There  is  not 
a  day  passes  but  there  aie  more  oi  leas  who  f^ll  a  sacrifice 
to  this  savage  disposition  The  Whigs  seem  determined  to 
extirpate  the  Tories,  and  the  Tories  the  Whigs.  Some  thou- 
sands have  fallen  in  this  way  in  this  quarter,  and  the  evil 
rages  with  more  violence  than  ever.  If  a  stop  cannot  be 
Boon  put  to  these  massacres,  the  country  will  be  depopu- 
lated in  a  few  months  more,  as  neither  Whig  nor  Tory  can 
live."" 

To  Lafayette,  General  Greene,  tinder  date  of  29th 
December,  1780,  describes  the  weakness  of  his  troops. 

"  It  is  now  within  a  few  days  of  the  time  you  mentioned 
of  being  with  me.  Were  you  to  arrive,  you  would  find  a 
few  ragged,  half-starved  troops  in  the  wilderness,  deatltuto 
of  everything  necessary  for  either  the  comfort  or  conven- 
ience of  soldiers.  ....  The  country  is  almost  laid  waste, 
and  the  inhabitants  plunder  one  another  with  Httle  less 
than  savage  fury.  We  live  from  hand  to  mouth,  and  have 
nothing  to  subsist  on  but  what  we  collect  with-  armed  par- 
ties.    In  this  situation,  I  believe  you  will  agree  with  me, 

1  Life  itnd  Correspondenca  of  Jnaeph  Reed,  Vol.  II.  p.  861.  Johnson's 
Life  imd  Correspondence  of  Nathaniel  Oreene,  Vol.  n.  p.  8T. 

z  Gordon,  History  of  the  Rise,  etc.,  of  the  Independence  of  the  United 
States,  Vol.  IV.  p.  99. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS. 


tliere  is  nothing  inviting  this  way,  oapeoially  when  I  assure 
you  our  whole  force  fit  for  duty,  that  are  properly  clothed 
and  properly  equipped,  does  not  amount  to  eight  hundred. 


Writing  to  Mr.  Varmira,  a  member  of  Ci 
General  says :  — 

"There  is  a  great  spint  of  enteiprne  pievailing  among 
the  nulitia  of  these  Southern  Std.tea  especially  with  the  vol- 
unteers. But  their  mode  of  gi  ing  to  war  is  so  destnichve, 
that  it  is  tli«  greatest  Jolly  m  fhf  world  to  trai,t  the  liberlies 
of  a  people  to  such  a  pjecarwas  defence    * 

Nothing  can  be  more  authentic  oi  complete  than 
tliis  testimony.  Heie,  also,  la  ■what  i'^  said  by  David 
Eamsay,  an  estimable  citizen  of  South  Caiolina,  in  his 
Historj-  of  the  Eevolution  m  tint  State  pubhshed  in 
1785,  only  a  short  time  litci  the  'icene^  v.  hicli  he  de- 
scribes, 

"While  the  Americin  foldiois  lav  enLamped  in  this  in- 
active situation,"  (in  the  low  country  neai  Charleston,) 
"  their  tattered  rags  were  so  completely  worn  out,  that  seven 
hundred  of  them  were  as  naked  as  tiey  were  bom,  excepting 
a  small  slip  of  cloth  about  their  waLafs  ;  and  they  were  near- 
ly as  destitute  of  meat  as  of  clothii^."  * 

To  the  same  effect  is  a  letter  from  Greene  to  Sumter, 
under  date  of  Jan.  15,  1781. 

"  It  is  a  great  misfortune  that  the  little  force  we  have  is 
in  such  a  wretched  state  for  want  of  clothing.  More  than 
one  half  our  numbers  are  in  a  manner  naked,  so  much  so 

'  Jolinson's  Life  and  Corraapondenoe  of  Greene,  VoL  I.  p.  340. 

2  Ibid.,  p.  397. 

1  HistoryoftlieBeTOlntiotiof  South  Carolina,  Vol.  II.  p.  268. 


■cibyGoogIc 


402  EEPLY   TO   ASSAILAXTS. 

that  we  cannot  put  them  on  the  least  kind  of  duty.  Indeed, 
there  is  a  great  number  that  have  not  a  rag  of  clothes  on 
them,  except  a  little  piece  of  blanket,  in  the  Indian  form, 
around  their  w-aists."  ^ 

The  military  weakness  of  this  "  slaveholding  com- 
munity "  is  but  too  apparent  As  I  show  its  occasion, 
you  will  join  with  me  in  amazement  that  a  Senator 
from  South  Carolina  should  attribute  Independence  to 
anything  "  alaveholding,"  The  records  of  the  country, 
and  various  voices,  all  disown  his  vaunt  for  Slavery. 
The  State  of  South  Carolina  itself,  by  authentic  histoiy, 
disowns  it.     I  give  the  proofs. 

The  first  is  from  the  debate  on  the  Confederation  in 
the  Continental  Congress,  as  early  as  July,  1776,  when 
the  following  passage  occurred,  which  I  quote  from 
"Notes  of  Debates  in  the  Continental  Congress  in  1775 
and  1776;'  preserved  by  John  Adams.  Mr.  Lynch,  a 
young  representative  of  South  Carohna,  showing  the 
sensibihties,  if  not  the  evil  spirit,  engendered  by  Slav- 
ery, speaking  in  behalf  of  the  Southern  States,  said : 
"If  it  is  debated  whether  their  slaves  are  their  prop- 
erty, there  is  an  end  of  the  Confederation.  Our  slaves 
being  our  property,  why  should  they  be  taxed  more  than 
the  land,  sheep,  cattle,  horses,  &e.  ?"  Without  noticing 
the  menace  against  the  Confederation,  the  beginning  of 
a  long  line,  Franklin  replied,  with  sententious  author- 
ity: "Slaves  rather  weaken' than  strengthen  the  State, 
and  there  is  therefore  some  difference  between  them 
and  sheep.  Sheep  will  never  make  any  inswrrections."  ^ 
Franldin  touched  the  point. 

1  Johnson's  Life  Hnii  Correspondence  of  Graona,  Vol.  I.  p.  393. 

2  Works  of  John  Adams,  Vol.  11.  p.  488.  Sea  also  Bancroft's  History  of 
the  United  Stfttos,  Vol.  IX.  p.  63. 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPLY   TO    ASSAILANTS.  4Ud 

And  now  listen,  if  yon  please,  to  peculiar  and  deci- 
sive testimony,  under  date  of  29tli  March,  1779,  from 
the  Secret  Journals  of  the  Continental  Congress, 

"  The  Committee  appointed  to  take  into  consideration  the 
drcumstancm  of  the  Southern  States,  and  the  ways  and  means 
for  their  safety  and  defence,  report,  ....  That  the  State  of 
South  Carolina  {as  represented  by  the  Delegates  to  the  said 
State,  and  by  Mr.  Huger,  who  has  come  hither  at  the  request 
of  the  Governor  of  the  said  State,  on  purpose  to  explain  the 
particular  circumstances  thereof)  is  UNABLE  to  make  any 
effectual  efforts  with  militia,  by  reason  of  the  great  propor- 
tion of  citizens  necessary  to  remain  at  home,  to  prevent  insitr- 
rections  ammi^  tJie  negroes,  and  to  prevent  the  desertion  of 
them  to  the  enemy ;  that  the  state  of  the  country,  and  th^ 
greai  numbers  of  those  people  among  them,  expose  the  inhab- 
itants to  great  danger,  from  the  endeavors  of  the  enemy  to 
excite  them  either  to  revolt  or  desert"  ^ 

Here  is  South  Carolina  secretly  disclosing  her  milita- 
ry wealineas,  and  its  ^oble  occasion :  thus  repudiating 
in  advance  the  vaunt  of  her  Senator,  who  finds  strength 
and  gi-atulation  in  Slavery  rather  than  in  Freedom.  It 
was  during  the  war,  and  in  the  confessional  of  the  Con- 
tinental Congress,  that,  on  hended  knees,  she  shrived 
heraelf.  But  the  same  ignominious  confession  was  made, 
some  time  after  the  war,  in  open  debate,  on  tlie  floor 
of  Coi^ress,  by  Mr.  Burke,  a  Eepreaentative  from  South 
Carolina. 

"  There  is  not  a  gentleman  on  the  floor  who  is  a  stranger 
to  the  feeble  situation  of  oiir  State,  when  we  entered  into  the 
war  to  oppose  the  British  power.  We  were  not  only  wUhmit 
money,  witlurut  an  army  or  military  stores,  but  we  were  few  in 

1  Secret  Jonmais,  VoL  I.  pp.  lOT,  108. 


;db,Googlc 


404  KEPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS. 

number,  and  likehj  to  be  entangled  wiih  <nvr  domestics,  in  case 
tlie  enemy  invaded  us."  ^ 

Similar  testimony  to  this  weakness  was  borne  by 
Mr.  Madison  in  open  debate  in  Congress. 

"Every  addition  they  [Georgia  and  South  Carolina]  re- 
ceive to  their  number  of  slaves  tends  to  weaken,  and  reader 
tliem  less  capable  of  self-defence"  * 

Tbe  historiaai  of  South  Carolina,  Dr.  Eamsay,  a  con- 
temporary observer  of  the  very  scene?  which  he  de- 
scribes, to  whom  I  have  aheady  referred,  also  exposes 
this  weakness. 

"  The  forces  nnder  the  command  of  General  Prevoet 
marched  through  the  richest  settlements  of  the  State,  where 
are  the  fewest  white  inhabitants  in  proportion  to  the  num- 
ber of  slaves.  Tlie  hapless  Africans,  allitred  witk  hopes  of 
freedom,  forsook  t/ieir  owners,  and  repaired  in  great  numbers 
to  the  royal  army.  They  endeavored  to  recommend  them- 
selves to  their  new  masters  by  discovering  where  their  own- 
ers had  concealed  their  property,  and  were  afisisting  in  carry- 
ing it  off."  * 

The  same  candid  historian,  describing  the  invasion 
of  the  next  year,  says  -.  — 

"  The  slaves  a  second  time  focl^ed  to  the  British  army."  * 

At  a  still  later  day,  Mr.  Justice  Johnson,  of  the  Su- 
preme Court  of  the  United  States,  and  a  citizen  of  South 
Carolina,  in  his  elaborate  life  of  General  Greene,  spealc- 
ing  of  negro  slaves,  makes  tho  same  unhappy  admission. 
He  says:  — 

"  But   the   number   dispersed  through  these  [Southern] 

1  AnimlB  of  Congress,  1st  Cong.  2cl  Sess.,  II.  1484,  March  30, 1790. 
■    *  Ibid.,  I8t  Cong.  iBt  Sess.,  I.  340,  Mnj  18, 1T89. 
*  History  of  South  Carolina,  Vol.  L  pp.  312,  313. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  405 

States  was  very  great, — so  great  as  to  render  it  impossible  for 
tJie  citizens  to  muster  freetneit  enough  to  mtlistand  the  pressure 
of  the  British  arms."  > 

Here  is  illustration  from  an  English  pamplilet  enti- 
tled "Account  of  the  Duckenfield  Hall  Estate  Negroes, 
1806,  law  Case,"  wheie  will  be  found  the  foUowing  in- 
cident, 

"In  1779  I  bought  ten  negroes,  which,  with  sixty  others, 
were  taken  by  a  privateer  from  a  plantation  in  South  Caro- 
lina." 

Thus  from  every  quarter  are  we  conducted  to  the 
same  conclusion. 

And  all  this  cumulative  and  uuimpeachahle  testimony 
is  reinforced  by  testimony  of  an  earlier  day,  also  irom 
South  Carolina.  The  Assembly  of  the  Colony  repre- 
sented to  the  Kii^,  in  1734,  that  they  were 

"  Subject  to  Timny  intestine  dangers  from,  the  great  number 
of  negroes  that  are  now  among  us."  ' 

Another  representation  shortly  afterwards  declared ;  — 
"  If  any  stop  be  put  to  the  exportation  of  rice  from  South 
Carohna  to  Europe,  it ...  .  may  render  the  whole  Colony 
an  easy  prey  to  their  neighbors,  the  Indians  and  Spaniards, 
and  also  to  those  yet  more  dangerous  enemies,  their  own  negroes, 
who  are  ready  to  reoolt  on  the  first  opportunity,  and  are  eight 
tim^  as  many  in  number  as  there  are  white  men  able  to 
bear  arms."^ 

Thus  was  it  before,  as  during  the  Revolution,  —  weak- 
ness always,  nothing  but  weakness. 

And  this  is  precisely  according  to  human  experience. 

1  LIfB  of  Greene,  Vol.  11.  Appendix,  p,  472, 

2  Grahame,  History  of  tlie  TJnitad  States,  Vol,  III.  p,  161, 
«  Ibid.,  p.  ai6 


■cibyGoogIc 


406  REPLY  TO   ASSAILANTS. 

It  waa  in  South  Carolina  as  it  had  been  in  other  lands 
where  Slavery  prevailed.  Hei-e  I  read  the  testimony  of 
a  remarkable  writer.  Archbishop  Whately. 

"  For  if  there  be  any  one  truth  which  the  deductions  of 
reason  alone,  independent  of  history,  would  lead  us  to  an- 
ticipate, and  which  again  history  alone  would  establish  inde- 
pendently of  antecedent  reasoning,  it  is  this :  that  a  whole 
class  of  men  placed  permajiently  under  the  ascendency  of 
another  as  subjects,  without  the  rights  of  citizens,  must  be 
a  source,  at  the  best,  of  wea&neM,  and  generalty  of  danger,  to  the 

State It  is  notorious,  accordingly,  how  much  Sparta 

was  weakened  and  endangered  by  the  Helots,  always  ready 
to  avail  themselves  of  any  public  disaster  as  an  occasion  for 
revolt." ' 

The  Archbishop  then  recalls  how  Hannibal  for  sixteen 
years  maintained  himself  in  Italy  against  the  Itomans, 
and,  tho^:^,'h  seantUy  supplied  from  Carthage,  recruited 
hia  ranks  by  tlie  aid  of  Eoinan  subjects.  Truly  does  he 
say  that  every  pi^e  of  history  teaches  the  same  lesson, 
and  proclaims  in  every  different  form,  "  How  long  sliall 
these  men  be  a  snare  unto  us  ? "  ^ —  and  also,  "  The  rem- 
nant of  these  nations  which  thou  shalt  not  drive  out 
shall  be  pricks  in  thine  eyes  and  thorns  in  thy  side."  ^ 

Surely,  Sir,  this  is  enough,  and  more.  I'rom  authen- 
tic documents,  including  the  very  muster-rolls  of  the 
Kevolution,  we  learn  the  small  contributions  of  men 
and  the  military  weakness  of  the  Soutliem  States,  par- 
ticularly of  South  Carolina,  as  compared  with  the  North- 
em  States ;  and  from  the  very  lips  of  Soiith  Carolina  her- 

I  EssaysonSfimeoftheDangerstoClirlstlanFnitli,  pp.  214-216,  note  P, 
ad  edition.  See  niso  Bncon's  Essays,  with  AniiotiitLons  by  Whtitoly,  pp, 
127-130:  Annotations  to  Essay  XV. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  407 

self,  on  four  different  occasions,  —  by  a  Committee,  by 
.  one  of  her  Eepresentatives  in  Congi'ess,  by  her  historian, 
and  by  an  eminent  citizen, — we  have  the  confession,  not 
only  of  -weakness,  but  that  this  weakness  was  caused  by 
Slavery.  And  yet,  in  the  face  of  this  combined  and  au- 
thoritative testimony,  we  afe  called  to  listen,  in  the 
American  Senate,  to  the  arrogant  boast,  from  a  venera- 
ble Senator,  that  American  Independence  was  acliieved 
by  Uie  arms  and  treasure  of  "  slaveholding  communi- 
ties": an  assumption  baseless  as  the  fabric  of  a- vision, 
in  any  way  it  may  be  interpreted, — whether  as  meaning 
baldly  tliat  Independence  was  achieved  by  those  South- 
em  States,  the  peculiar  home  of  Slavery,  or  that  it  was 
achieved  by  any  strength  or  influence  which  came  from 
that  noxious  source.  Sir,  I  speak  here  for  a  Common- 
wealth of  just  renown,  but  I  speak  also  for  a  cause 
M'hich  is  more  than  any  Commonwealth,  even  tlKit  which 
I  repr^ent ;  and  I  caimot  allow  the  Senator  to  discred- 
it eitlier.  ISTot  by  Slavery,  but  in  spite  of  Shtvery,  was 
Independence  achieved.  Not  because,  but  notwithstatul' 
ing,  there  were  "slaveholding  communities,"  did  tri- 
umph descend  upon  our  arms.  It  was  the  inspu?ation 
of  Liberty  Universal  that  conducted  us  thraugh  the 
lied  Sea  of  the  Eevolution,  as  it  had  already  given  to 
the  Declaration  of  Independence  its  mighty  tone,  re- 
sounding through  the  ages.  "  Let  it  be  remembered," 
said  the  Nation,  speaking  by  the  voice  of  the  Conti- 
nental Congress,  at  the  close  of  the  war,  "that  it  has 
ever  been  the  pride  and  boast  of  America,  that  the 
rights  for  which  she  contended  were  the  rights  of 
HUMAN  NATUHE." '  Yes,  Sir,  in  this  behalf,  and  by  this 
sign,  we  conquered. 

I  Adilress  to  the  States,  April  2ii,  1783:  Journal  of  Congress,  Vol.  VIIL 
p.  201. 


■cibyGoogIc 


408  REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS. 

Such,  Sir,  is  my  answer  on  this  head  to  the  Senatoi 
from  South  Carolina.  If  the  work  which  I  undertook 
haa  been  done  thoroughly,  he  must  not  blame  me.  Jus- 
tice demanded  that  it  should  be  thoTOugli.  But,  while 
thus  repelling  insinuations  against  Massachusetts,  and 
assumptions  for  Slavery,  I  would  not  unnecessarily 
touch  the  sensibilities  of  that  Senator,  or  of  the  State 
which  he  represents.  I  cannot  foiget,  that,  amidst  all 
diversities  of  opinion,  we  are  bound  together  hy  ties 
of  a  common  country,  —  that  Massachusetts  and  South 
Carolma  are  sister  States,  and  that  the  concord  of  sis- 
ters ought  to  prevail  between  them ;  but  I  am  con- 
strained to  declare,  that,  throughout  this  debate,  I  have 
sought  in  vain  any  token  of  that  just  spirit  wliich  with- 
in the  sphere  of  its  influence  is  calculated  to  promote 
the  concord  whether  of  State  or  of  individuals. 

And  now,  for  the  present,  I  part  with  the  venerable 
Senator  from  Soutli  Carolina,  Pursuing  his  inconsist- 
encies, and  exposing  them  to  judgment,  I  had  almost 
forgotten  his  associate  leader  in  the  wanton  personal 
assault  upon  me  in  this  long  debate,  —  I  mean  the  vet- 
eran Senator  from  Vii^nia  [Mr.  Mason],  who  is  now 
directly  in  my  eya  With  imperious  look,  and  in  the 
style  of  Sir  Forcible  Feeble,  tliat  Senator  undertakes  to 
call  in  question  my  statement,  that  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Act  denies  the  writ  of  Habeas  Corpus;  and  in  doing 
this,  he  assumes  a  superiority  for  himself,  which,  per- 
mit me  to  tell  him  now  in  this  presence,  nothing  in  him 
can  warrant.  Sir,  I  claim  little  for  myself ;  but  I  shrink 
in  no  respect  from  any  comparison  with  that  Senator, 
veteran  though  he  be.  Sitting  near  him,  as  has  been 
my  fortune  since  I  had  the  honor  of  a  seat  in  this  cham- 


■cibyGooglc 


EEPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  409 

her,  I  have  come  to  know  aomethiiig  of  liis  conversation, 
aomething  of  his  manners,  something  of  his  attainments, 
something  of  his  ahOities,  something  of  his  character,  — 
ay.  Sir,  and  somethuig  of  his  associations ;  and,  while  I 
would  not  disparage  him  in  any  of  these  respects,  I  feel 
that  I  do  not  exalt  myself  undidy,  that  I  do  not  claim  too 
much  for  the  position  which  I  hold  or  the  name  which 
I  have  established,  when  I  openly  declare,  that,  as  Sen- 
ator of  Massachusetts,,  and  as  man,  I  place  myself  at 
every  point  in  unhesitating  comparison  with  that  hon- 
orable assailant.  And  to  his  peremptory  assertion,  that 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  does  not  deny  the  Habeas  Coi'pus, 
I  oppose  my  assertion,  peremptory  as  his  own,  that  it 
doeSy  —  and  there  I  leave  that  issue. 

Mr.  President,  I  welcome  the  sensibility  which  the 
Senator  from  Virginia  manifests  at  the  exposure  of  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Act  He  is  the  author  of  that  enormity. 
From  his  brain  came  forth  the  soulless  monster.  He 
is,  therefore,  its  natural  guardian.  The  Senator  is,  I  be- 
lieve, a  lawyer.  And  now,  since  at  last  he  shows  pa- 
rental solicitude  to  shield  his  offspring,  he  must  do  more 
than  vainly  parry  the  objection  that  it  denies  the  great 
writ  of  Habeas  Corpus.  It  is  true,  Sir,  if  anything  but 
Slavery  were  in  question,  such  an  objection,  if  merely 
plausible,  would  he  fatal ;  but  it  is  not  to  be  supposed 
that  the  partisans  of  an  institution  founded  on  denial 
of  human  rights  can  appreciate  the  proper  efficacy  of 
that  writ.  Sir,  I  challenge  the  Senator  to  defend  his 
progeny, — not  by  assertion,  but  by  reason.  Let  him 
rally  aU  the  ability,  learning,  and  subtilty  which  he  can 
command,  and  undertake  tlie  impossible  work. 

Let  him  answer  this  objection;  The  Constitution,  by 
an  amendment  which  Samuel  Adams  hailed  as  a  protee- 


■cibyGooglc 


410  KEPLY  TO   ASSAILANTS. 

tion  against  the  usurpations  of  the  National  Govern- 
ment, and  which  Jefferson  asserted  was  its  very  "  foun- 
dation," has  solemnly  declared  that  "the  powera  not 
delegated  to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitution,  nor 
prohibited  hy  it  to  the  States,  ate  reserved  to  the  States 
respectively,  or  to  the  people."  Stronger  words  could 
not  be  employed  to  limit  the  powers  under  the  Consti- 
tution, and  to  protect  the  people  from  all  assumptions 
of  the  National  Government,  particularly  in  deroga- 
tion of  Freedom.  By  the  Virginia  Resolutions  of  1798, 
which  the  Senator  is  reputed  to  accept,  this  limitation 
of  the  powers  of  the  National  Government  is  recognized 
and  enforced.  The  Senator  himself  is  understood,  on 
all  questions  not  affecting  the  claims  of  Slavery,  to  es- 
pouse this  rule  in  its  utmost  strictness.  Let  him  now 
indicate,  if  he  can,  any  ailiicle,  clause,  phrase,  or  word 
in  the  Constitution  which  gives  to  Congress  any  power 
to  establish  a  "  uniform  law  throughout  the  United 
States  "  on  the  subject  of  fugitive  slaves.  Let  Mm  now 
show,  if  he  can,  from  the  records  of  the  National  Con- 
vention, one  jot  of  evidence  inclinii^'  to  any  such  pow- 
er. "Whatever. its  interpretation  in  other  respects,  the 
clause  on  wliich  this  bill  purports  to  be  founded  gives 
no  such  power.  Sir,  nothing  can  come  out  of  nothing ; 
and  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  is,  therefore  without  any 
source  or  origin  in  the  Constitution  It  is  an  Dpen  and 
unmitigated  usurpation. 

Wlien  the  veteran  Senator  of  Yuginia  has  answered 
this  objection,  when  he  is  able  to  find  m  the  Constitu- 
tion a  power  which  is  not  to  be  found  and  to  make  us 
see  what  is  not  to  he  seen,  then  let  him  inswer  another 
objection.  The  Constitution  has  secured  the  inestimable 
right  of  Trial  by  Jury  "in  suits  at  Common  Law,  where 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILAHTS.  411 

the  value  in  controversy  shall'  exceed  twenty  dollars." 
,  Of  course  Freedom  is  not  susceptible  of  pecuniaiy  valu- 
ation ;  therefore  there  can  be  no  question  that  the  claim 
for  a  fugitive  slave  is  within  this  condition.  In  deter- 
mining what  is  meant  by  "  suits  at  Common  Law,"  re- 
course must  he  had  to  the  Common  Law  itself,  precisely 
as  we  resort  to  that  law  in  order  to  determine  what  is 
meant  hy  "  Trial  by  Jury."  Let  the  Senator,  if  he  he 
a  lawyer,  undertake  to  show  that  a  claim  for  a  fugitive 
slave  is  not,  according  to  early  precedents  and  writs,  — 
well  known  to  the  framers  of  the  Constitution,  espe- 
cially to  Charles  Cotesworth  Pinckney  and  John  Eut- 
ledge,  of  South  Carolina,  both  of  whom  had  studied  law 
at  the  Temple, — a  suit  at  G(ymin<r)i  Law,  to  which,  under 
the  solemn  guaranty  of  the  Constitution,  is  attached  the 
Trial  by  Jury,  as  an  insepamble  incident  Let  the  Sen- 
ator show  this,  if  he  can. 

And,  Sir,  when  the  veteran  Senator  has  found  a  power 
in  the  Constitution  where  none  exists,  and  has  set  aside 
the  r^ht  of  Trial  by  Jury  in  a  suit  at  Common  Law, 
then  let  him  answer  yet  another  objection.  By  the 
judgment  of  the  Supreme  Court  of  tlie  United  States, 
a  claim  for  a  fugitive  slave  is  declared  to  be  a  case  un- 
der the  Constitutwn}  within  the  judicial  power ;  and  this 
judgment  of  the  Court  is  confirmed  by  common  sense 
and  Common  Law,  Let  the  Senator  show,  if  he  can,  how 
such  exalted  exercise  of  judicial  power  can  be  confided 
,to  a  single  petty  magistrate,  appointed,  not  by  the  Pres- 
ident, with  the  advice  and  consent  of  the  Senate,  but 
by  the  Court,  —  holding  his  office,  not  during  good  be- 
havior, but  merely  during  the  will  of  the  Court,  —  and 
receiving,  not  a  regular  salary,  but  fees  according  to 
1  Prigg  V.  PeuQpjlvanin,  IB  Peters,  616. 


;db,Googlc 


412  KEPLY   TO   ASSAILASTS. 

each  individual  case,  Let  the  Senator  answer  this  oh- 
jection,  if,  in  any  way,  hy  twist  of  learning,  logic,  or  law, 
he  can. 

Thus,  Sir,  do  I  present  the  issue  directly  on  this 
monstrous  enactment.  Let  the  author  of  the  Fugitive 
Slave  Bill  meet  it.  He  will  find  me  ready  to  follow 
him  in  ailment,  —  though  I  trust  never  to  be  led, 
even  hy  his  example,  into  any  departure  from  those 
courtesies  of  debate  which  are  essential  to  the  harmony 
of  every  legislative  body. 

Such,  Mr.  President,  ia  my  response  to  all  that  has 
been  said  in  this  debate,  so  far  as  1  deem  it  in  any 
way  worthy  of  attention.  To  the  two  associate  chief- 
tains in  this  personal  assault,  the  veteran  Senator  from 
Vitgmia,  and  the  Senator  from  South  Carolina  with  the 
silver-white  locks,  I  have  replied  completely.  It  is  tnie 
that  others  have  joined  in  the  cry  which  these  associates 
first  started ;  but  I  shall  not  he  tempted  further.  Some 
there  are  best  answered  hy  silence,  best  answered  hy 
withholding  the  words  which  leap  impulsively  to  the 
hps.  [Sere  Mr.  Sumner  twmed  to  Mr.  Mallory  and  Mr. 
Clay.} 

And  now,  giving  to  oblivion  all  these  thin^,  let  me, 
as  I  close,  dwell  on  a  single  aspect  of  this  discussion, 
which  will  render  it  memorable.  On  former  occasions 
like  this,  the  right  of  petition  has  been  vehemently 
assailed  or  practically  denied.  Only  two  years  ago, 
memorials  for  the  repeal  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act, 
presented  by  me,  were  laid  on  your  table,  Mr.  President, 
without  reference  to  any  Committee.  All  is  changed 
now.  Senators  have  condemned  the  memorial,  and 
Bounded  in  our  ears  the  cry  of  "Treason!  treason!"  — 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  413 

but  tlms  far,  throughout  tliis  excited  debate,  no  person 
has  so  completely  outraged  the  spirit  of  our  institutions, 
or  forgotten  himself,  as  to  persevere  in  objecting  to  the 
reception  of  the  memorial,  and  its  proper  reference.  It 
is  true,  the  remonstrants  and  their  representatives  here 
are  treated  with  indignity ;  but  the  great  right  of  peti- 
tion, the  sword  and  buckler  of  the  citizen,  though  thua 
dishonored,  is  not  denied.  Here,  Sir,  is  a  triumph  for 
Freedom, 


When  Mr,  Sumner  had  finished,  Mr.  Clay,  of  Alabama,  wade  haste 
to  say,  "He  has  put  the  question,  whether  any  Senator  upon  this 
floor  would  assist  in  returning  a  fugitive  slave  f  No  response  was  made 
to  the  inten'ogatory ;  and  lest  ho  should  herald  it  to  the  world  that 
there  was  no  Senator  upon  this  floor  who  had  the  moral  amrage  1« 
^y  '  ^y<'  io  response  to  the  interrogatory,  I  teU  him  that  I  would 
doit."  To  wHeh  Mr,  Sumner  replied  at  onoa,  "Then  let  the  Senator 
say  the  imm/zral  anirage." 

Mr.  Butler  rose  to  reply,  when  Mr.  Badger  asked  his  "fiiand  from 
South  Carolina,  whether  it  would  not  he  better  for  him  io  allow  iia  now 
to  adjourn  J"  To  which  Mr.  Butler  answered :  "No,  Sit;  I  would  not 
subject  myself  to  the  temptation  of  preparing  a  reply  that  might  have 
something  ill  it,  that,  like  a  hyena,  I  was  scratohmg  at  the  graves  in 
Msaaaohusetts,  to  take  revenge  for  the  elaborate  and  vindictive  assault 
that  has  heen  made  by  the  gentleman  who  has  just  spoken."  The 
6lo^  shows  his  continued  anger  and  excitement,  which  hroke  out  es 
peeially  at  the  comparison  Mr.  Sumner  made  between  the  Stamp  Act 
and  the  Slave  Act,  and  at  his  refusal  t«  surrender  a  fugitive  slave, 
These  seemed  to  he  the  two  gi'ouuds  of  offence.  On  the  latter  point,  Mr. 
Butler,  contrary  to  Mr.  Sumner's  positive  declaration,  was  persistant 
in  saying  that  he  had  denied  tile  oblation  of  his  oath  to  support  the 
Constitution,  when  he  had  only  denied  his  obligation  to  surrender  a 
fugitive  slave.  At  this  stage,  Mr.  Fessenden,  of  Maine,  remai'ked ! 
"The  answer  made  by  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  was  in  these 
precise  words;  'I  recognize  no  such  obligation.'  1  did  not  undei'stand 
that  Senator  as  meaning  to  say  that  he  would  not  obey  the  Constitu- 
tion, OF  would  disregard  his  oath,  — nor,  allow  me  to  say,  was  he  so 
understood  by  many  gentlemen  on  this  side  of  the  chamber;  but  he 
simply  meant  to  say  (I  certainly  so  understood  him)  that  he  did  not  con- 


■cibyGooglc 


414  EEPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS. 

sider  that  the  Constitution  imposed  any  anch  obligation  upon  him.  That 
ia  all,"  Before  tbe  debate  closed,  Mr.  Touoey,  of  Connecticut,  said : 
"  I  beg  leave  to  ask  the  Senator  from  Maesaiihnsetts  whether  he  now 
recognizes  an  obligation  to  return  a  fugiti^  e  slave '  I  put  the  ciuesti  m 
in  general  language  Does  he  recogmze  the  obbgatton  to  return  a  fugi 
tive  slaye '  Mr  Sumner  then  aaid  To  that  I  answer  dietrnttly 
No."    Tl  e  petitiun  was  then  referred  to  the  Committee 

As  Mr  Snn  ner  rosun  ed  hia  seat,  after  his  speech  m  reply  to  his 
assailants  Mi  Chase  who  sat  nest  to  him  aail  Ion  hav  stru  k 
Slavery  the  strongest  Mow  it  evei  lat^ied  you  have  made  it  reel 
to  the  centre  The  rage  of  its  representatives  was  without  bounds 
lie  suggestion  of  Mr  Pettlt  to  expel  him  was  the  first  idei  which  at 
last  gave  way  («  that  of  Mr  Clay  to  put  him  in  Coveptiy  The  fiist 
was  not  abandoned  at  once.  It  was  seriously  entertained.  The  news- 
papers of  the  time  represent  that  it  was  under  consideration  from  the 
day  of  his  speech, — that  "the  opposition  to  Mr.  Sumner  is  general  and 
bitter  in  the  Senate,  and  that  it  would  he  rash,  therefore,  to  assert  that 
the  resolution  will  not  be  presented,  and  that,  if  presented,  it  will  not 
be  carried."  It  was  added,  that  four  Forthem  Senators  were  pledged 
to  the  resolution.  The  Mienin^  Post  said,  Jesting'y:  "The  Washing- 
ton Umon,  and  those  of  whom  it  is  the  special  oi^n,  are  as  mudi 
puzzled  what  to  do  with  Senator  Sumner  as  the  Lilliputians  were  how 
to  dispose  of  Mr.  Leinnel  GullivCT,  when  he  made  his  appearance 
among  them."  Other  papers  treated  the  subject  more  gravely.  The 
Natkmal  Era,  at  Washington,  said;  "When  we  heard  that  a  pro- 
ject for  the  expulsion  of  Mr.  Sumner  was  under  consideration  among 
some  Senators,  we  scouted  the  report  as  simply  ridieulous ;  but  there 
is  no  limit  to  the  insolence  and  folly  of  some  men.  On  inquiry,  we 
learned  that  such  a  project  was  seriously  canvassed." 

This  debate  was  profoundly  felt  throughout  the  country.  Mr, 
Sumner's  speech  was  telegraphed  to  the  Morth,  and  extensively  read. 
People  there  were  smarting  under  the  repeal  of  the  Missouri  Prohibi- 
tion and  the  attempt  to  enforce  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act.  They  were 
glad  to  find  the  audacious  pretensions  of  the  slave-masters  repelled  in 
Congress.  Newspapers  were  enthnsiastio.  The  correspondent  of  the 
Hew  York  Times  wrote :  — 

"  This  able,  triumphant  vindication,  which  covered  the  Hssailants  with 
confusion,  told  with  the  more  eiTect  because  it  was  unexpected.  It  had 
been  supposed  that  Mr.  Sumner  would  submit  quietly  to  any  indignity  that 
might  be  heaped  npon  him ;  but  the  people,  doubtless,  when  they  read  his 


;db,Googlc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  415 

Bpeeoh,  wUl  acknowledge  that  ha  held  in  reserve,  and  knew  when  and  how 
to  nae,  weapons  of  defence  far  keener  than  the  bowie-knife,  and  far  more  cer- 
tain and  fatal  than  the  dnellist's  rifle  ;  and  his  oouiitrymen  will  honor  the 
moral  courage  lliat  enabled  him  to  bear  nnflinohingly  all  the  crnel  taunta 
of  hia  miareekoning  assailants,  antil  the  time  had  arrived  for  drawing  the 

arrows  of  Trath I  have  not  been  accustomed  to  praise  the  Senator 

who  is  now  my  theme;  but  that  heart  must  be  cold,  and  that  judgment 
lamentably  distorted,  which  could  withboid  from  Mr.  Sumner  his  well- 
earned  tribute  for  to-day'e  ocqaittance." 

The  Springfield  S^uUican  thus  characterizes  the  speech :  — 

"  Curiosity  has  bean  greatly  stimulated  to  see  it  in  foil,  and  it  will  amply 
repay  atleution.  Mr.  Smnnar  has  made  more  brilliant,  olassical,  sobolnrly 
speeches,  but  never  one  more  effective,  nor  one  upon  which  his  fame  as  Con- 
gressional debater  can  more  creditably  rest.  It  was  a  fiill  vindication  of 
himself  and  of  Massachusetts,  and  its  influence  and  effect  have  been  marked 
at  Washmgion.  It  euded  the  discQssion  which  the  South  so  vauntingly  pro- 
voked. There  has  been  no  essay  at  reply.  It  carried  the  war  into  the  bow- 
els of  his  opponents  in  a  manner  not  ordinarily  oscusable,  but,  after  the 
provocation  which  had  been  given,  in  this  instance  moat  abundantly  justifi- 
able.   His  annihilation  of  his  accusers  was  oompleta." 

In  a  speech  at  Providence  shortly  afterwards,  Mr.  Giddings,  of  the 
House  of  Representatives,  referred  to  this  effort,  which  he  lieard,  in  eym- 
pathetio  terms. 

"They  assailed  Sumner  because  be  said,  'Is  thy  servant  a  dog,  that  he 
should  do  this  tiling? '  in  reply  hi  the  question,  whether  he  would  assist  in 
the  capture  of  a  digitive  slave  ?  He  was  assailed  by  the  whole  Slave  Power 
in  tlie  Senate,  and  for  a  time  he  was  the  constant  theme  of  their  vitupera- 
tion. The  maddened  waves  roiled  and  dashed  against  him  for  two  or  three 
days,  until  eventually  he  obtained  the  floor  himself.  Then  he  arose  and 
threw  back  the  dashing  suiges  with  a  power  of  inimitable  eloquence  utterly 

indescribable I  assure  yon  that  last  week  was  the  proudest  week  t 

ever  saw.  Sninner  stood  inimitable,  and  hurled  back  the  tannta  of  his  aa- 
sailants  with  irresistible  force.  There  he  stood  towering  above  the  infamous 
characters  who  had  attempted  to  silence  him,  while  I  sat  and  listened  with 
rapturous  emotion." 

The  interest  awakened,  hy  the  conflict  in  the  Senate  and  the  part 
borne  by  Mr.  Sumner  can  he  understood  only  by  reading  the  testimony 
of  the  time  in  private  letters,  which  have  additional  value  in  the  light 
of  subsequent  events.  It  will  he  seen  how  Mr.  Sumner  was  Eupported, 
and  what  already  was  the  sentiment  of  the  Korth. 

Letters  oame  from  unknown  persona,  saying,  "  I  want  to  thank  you 
tor  that  speech."  On  the  next  day  after  its  delivery  Kev.  Theodore 
Parker  wrote;  — 


■cibyGoogIc 


416  KEPLY  TO   ASSAILANTS. 

"  I  iiayar  felt  so  proud  of  you  as  now,  and  can't  go  to  bed  witliout  first 
thanking  you  for  the  noble  words  which  Apthorp  has  just  read  me  ot  yours 

fi-om  the  Tt-ansci-ift  of  to-night.    Evan  phlegmatio is  raused  up  with 

your  fire.    God  bless  you !  " 

Hon.  John  P.  Hale,  of  the  Senate,  wrote  from  DoTer,  K.  H.,  wider 
date  of  July  3d ;  — 

"  As  I  came  from  Washington  to  this  place,  m  New  York,  Boston,  and  in 
ateaiiiboats  and  vailraad  cars,  I  heard  bat  one  esprassion  in  regard  to  your 
speech,  and  that  was  of  unmingled  gratification.  I  have  heard  all  classes, 
Whigs  and  others,  and  there  is  do  exception.  Ladiaa  particularly  are  in 
ecstasies  at  it.  Mrs.  Hale  says, '  Give  him  my  thanks  for  his  speech.'  The 
feeling  of  gratification  at  your  speech  is  so  gi-eat,  that  people  do  not  tbink, 
roucli  less  speak,  of  the  Billingsgate  by  which  you  were  aaaailed." 

Hon.  Henry  Wilson  thuB  expi'essed  his  feelings  in  a  letter  from  Bos- 

"  I  write  to  say  to  you  that  you  have  given  the  heaviest  blow  you  ever 
stmok  to  the  slavehoiding  oligarchy.  All  our  friends  are  doiighied,  and 
men,  who,  even  ap  to  this  hour  have  withheld  all  words  of  commendation, 
are  proud  of  your  speech,  and  loud  in  tlieir  commendations." 

John  A.  Andrew,  Esq.,  wrote  :  — 

"  Your  recent  rencontre  with  the  wild  haasta  of  Ephesus  has  bean  a  bril- 
liant auooesB.  I  have  regarded  that  debate  with  pride  and  gratification.  I 
am  glad  it  has  occurred  for  many  reasons,  private  and  personaJ,  as  well  as 
public  and  universal.  And  I  have  heard  no  parson  refer  to  it  but  In  terms 
the  most  gratilying  to  ray  friendship  for  you,  and  my  interest  in  the  oontro- 
varsy  iteelf.    I  think  our  friends  here  are  in  good  spirits  and  flill  of  hope. 

"  How  do  those  people  treat  yoo  now,  since  th?y  have  come  to  close 
quarters  with  yon  ?  I  hope  you  will  spare  not  You  had  ample  occasion, 
and  now  I  hope  yon  will  keep  up  the  war  agffretaively ;  never  fail  to  attack 
thera,  in  the  right  way,  whenever  thay  deserve  it  The  insolence  of  the 
presumption  to  stand  between  a  man  and  his  own  conscientious  interpre- 
tation of  the  Constitution,  especially  when  they  defiantly  and  every  day 
dara  everybody  to  tread  on  their  coat-tails,  at  the  price  of  treason  and 
rebellion,  under  tha  name  of '  diiindon,'  is  utterly  nnbearable. 

"  I  only  wish  they  uwiii  expel  you,  and  Chase,  and  Gillette,  —  all  three," 

Wendell  Phillips  was  most  earnest,  as  follows  :  — 

"  The  storm  of  lettars  of  oongratnlation  is  perhaps  Inllad  a  little  by  this 
time,  and  you  'II  have  a  moment's  leisure  to  receive  the  admiring  thanks  of 
an  old  friend.  Amid  so  much  that  was  sad  and  dark  at  home,  it  has  been 
delightful  to  sun  one's  self  now  and  then  in  the  glad  noon  of  hope  at  Wash- 
ington. The  whole  State  is  very  proud  of  yon  just  now.  If  your  six  years 
were  out  this  next  winter,  I  think  you  'd  be  run  in  again  without  a  com- 
petitor, and  by  a  vote  of  all  parties. 


;db,Googlc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  417 

"All  your  lata  efforts  have  beea  grand:  see  the  benefit  of  being  fnsulted. 
Your  last  richly  merited  the  claim  you  made  of  being  ihoroagh.  I  liked  nnd 
entirely  approved  tlie  self-raapaot  with  which  you  put  your  own  opinion 
Bide  by  aide  with  the  Virginian's  and  left  it.  You  claimed  not  a  tittle  too 
much,  aiidliBdeservedJDBt  that  sort  of  treatment. 

"  If,  amid  snch  universal  congratulation,  it  be  any  joy  to  yon  to  hear  my 
amen,  be  assured  it  is  most  heartily  shouted." 

Rev.  Joshua  Leavitl^  the  lifelong  Abolitionist,  wrote  from  New 
York:  — 

"I  have  jnst  rend  the  full  report  of  your  speech  with  Intense  satisfaction. 
It  is  a  glorious  work.  The  report,  the  echo,  the  effect  in  the  olJier  fleet, 
shows  ^t  it  was  saoh  a  broadside  as  Ihey  never  had  before." 

John  Jay  wrote  from  Bedford,  Hew  York,  the  country  home  of  his 
grandfather,  the  Chief  Justice  :  — 

"  I  have  read  your  speech  of  the  2Sth  June  with,  I  think,  more  thorough 
saasfaetion  and  delight  than  any  otlier  in  my  life,  not  excepting  even  yonf 
first  speech  on  tlie  Fagitive  BUI,  for  which  I  waited  so  impatiently,  as  your 
first  great  blow  in  the  Senate  against  American  Slavery.  Yoor  last  is 
a  glorious,  a  most  iriamphant  effort,  and  has  given  you  a  proud  and  com- 
manding position  before  the  country,  as  the  long  hoped-for  Champion  of 
the  North,  before  whose  fearless  front  and  ayenging  arm  Southern  insolence 
at  length  sliall  quaiL  How  the  Free  States  will  receive  yonr  words  is  already 
clear,  if  doubt  coald  have  been  entertained  of  it,  by  the  tone  genei'ally  of 
the  public  press,  and  the  delight  manifested,  botli  in  the  town  and  ooantvy, 
by  almost  all  who  speak  of  it.  In  our  quiet  neighborhood  I  find  people 
talking  of  it  euthusiaatically  whom  1  never  before  heard  express  tlie  slightest 
feeling  on  the  Slavery  question," 

Eev.  Convera  Francla,  the  eminent  professor  of  Harvard  University, 

"  When  I  came  to  that  answer  of  yonrs,  'ts  thy  servant  a  dog,  that  he 
should  do  this  thing? '  Icould  not  butoryont,'That  is  justtliethingi  Mr. 
Sumner  could  not  have  fonnd  in  all  litei'atuie  oi'  history  elsewhere  so  fitting 
words  for  reply,  when  he  was  asked  whether  he  would  send  back  a  slave.' 
And  your  admirable  application  of  Jefiferson's  desorlpClon  of  the  manners 
produced  by  Slavery  did  my  very  heart  good.  I  have  heard  but  one  opin- 
ion of  these  speeches  frtan  every  side;  indeed,  there  can  be  but  one,  — that 
which  expresses  timningled  admiration  and  delight." 

Dr.  Joseph  Sargent,  of  Worcester,  wrote  :  — 

"  You  mast  allow  me  to  thank  you  for  your  reply  to  the  assaults  of  Mr, 
PettltandMr.  Clay.  It  is  a  personal  matter  with  me,  and  all  of  ns ;  for  wo 
have  felt  ourselves  insulted,  and  we  are  satisfied.  I  have  read  all  your 
speeches  m  the  Senate  with  instruction  and  gratification;   bat  ibis  has 


■cibyGoogIc 


418  KBPI,y  TO  ASSAILANTS. 

warmed  me  30  tliat  I  cannot  withhold  my  thauks,  thongli  I  trespass  on  yonr 
time.  The  whole  community  feels  aa  I  do.  Meo  stop  their  business  to  ask 
eneh  other  if  they  have  read  Mr.  Sumner's  apflBch,  and  even  meu  calling  on 
me  to  visit  theu'  sick  families  forget  their  errand  till  they  have  put  the  uni- 
versal question.  We  have  hitherto  admired  your  fovbeamuoe,  but  your 
reply  is  as  dignifled  and  noble  as  your  forbearance,  vfliile  it  is  strong,  rich, 
and  Saxon.  We  have  had  nothing  like  it  siiioe  the  HUisemonu  letter.  I 
■will  say  no  more,  but  I  could  say  no  less." 

Theophilus  P.  Chandler,  Esq.,  of  Boston,  wrote  ;  — 

"  1  OBnnot  express  the  pleasure  yonr  friends  have  enjoyed  at  tlie  result  of 
the  late  Senatorial  conflict.  Old  Kogies  read  jour  speech  with  satisfaction, 
although  some  complam  of  the  Jackson  doctrine." 

Count  Garowski  wrote  from  Newport ;  — 

"Yon  showed  what  is  the  real  backbone  of  a  gentleman,  ojnsiiJered  in  the 
higher  moral  or  philosophical  point  of  view,  by  far  superior  to  what  your 
assailers  conceive  or  are  able  to  im.igine  in  tlieir  vulgar  or  low  concep- 


"  I  eongratnlate  you  upon  having  been  bJocJignardfld  and  denounced.  It 
has  redounded  to  yonr  honor.  It  has  proved  a  rare  success.  I  think  you 
should  thank  God  for  placing  yon,  in  his  wise  Providence,  in  a  position  wliich, 
utterly  hateful  as  it  mnst  be  to  jou  (fighting  with  wild  beasts  nt  Ephesas), 
proves  to  furnish  occasion  for  the  heroic  element.  I  can  dimly  surmise  how 
much  it  costs  yon  to  stand  there ;  but  I  doaht  not  the  asperienoe  you  are 
having  testifies  that  it  will  pay  the  cost,  and  a  gi-eit  deal  more.  I  may  be 
mistaken,  but,  from  all  I  have  learned  of  yonr  position  In  the  Senate,  things 
look  as  if  those  Soothern  men,  after  trying  to  steal  yonr  sting  away  by  all 
eorts  of  courtliness  and  courtesy,  and  trying  in  vatn,  have  tnmed  npon  yon 
like  rabid  dogs,  witli  the  intent  to  t«ar  yon  in  pieces.  They  have  not  done 
It,  nor  will  they." 

Hiram  Barney,  Esq.,  of  Few  York,  wrote ;  — 

"  I  congratulate  you  on  that  day's  work.  It  was  well  and  nobly  done,  I 
have  seen  something  of  yonr  assailants,  and  know  something  of  theit- habits 
and  manners,  and  can  appreciate  your  forbearance.  It  is  a  shame  tliat  you 
Should  be  obliged  to  meet  so  much  that  is  disgusting  to  the  taste  and  shock- 
ing to  tlie  moral  sense  in  the  American  Senate.  But  it  is  a  matter  of  jnst 
pride  that  the  friends  of  Freedom  there  are  gentlemen,  and  always  win  upon 
the  field  ofargnment." 

William  C.  Euseell,  Esq.,  of  Kew  York,  afterwards  professor  at  Cor- 
nell University,  wrote :  — 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO   ASSAILANTS,  419 

"  I  nm  delightei]  bayond  mensure  by  your  ceply.to  the  Southern  oliivalry. 
It  is  graiiJ,  gentlemaiily,  cool,  poiuled,  well  aimed,  aiid  truo  metal.  I  do  not 
wonder  that  Mr.  Butler  did  not  want  W  phiy  vampire  lo  MaaBftolniaetts. 
The  liiot  is,  It  ia  getting  to  l>e  rather  serioua  worlt  to  interfere  with  the  old 
Commonwealth;  and  1  shni!  be  am^prised,  if  the  Southern  bull-dogs  do  not 
bay  in  some  other  t[narter." 

Hon.  Charles  P.  Huntington,  of  Northampton,  afterwards  Judge  of 
the  Superior  Court  of  the  County  of  Suffolk,  wrote :  — 

"  I  have  been,  as  usual,  eKoeadingly  gratified  with  the  manner,  style,  and 
fpint  in  which  yoa  have  met  your  Seiiatoi-ial  respoasibilities  on  this  try- 
ing Nebraska  question.  But  the  reply  to  the  poraonid  attacks  and  insults  of 
Entlar  and  Jiaaoii  hiat  week  has  gratified  ina  more  than  anythii^  that  has 
fallen  from  yonr  lips,  —  so  seveie,  yet  so  just,  —  so  cutting,  yat  so  keen  and 
polished,  — so  decided,  manly,  and  bold,— so  indicative  of  backbone,  as 
well  as  pith  and  marrow,  that  your  adversaries  were  fairly  hung  up  and 
impaled." 

Hon.  Charles  O.  Loring,  the  eminent  lawyer,  wrote  :  — 
"  Tour  reply  to  the  Soothem  gentlemen,  who  seem  to  think  that  n  NorBiem 
man  must  be  craven,  elicited  general  and  great  admiration.  I  heartily  en- 
joyed it,  and  think  that  Mr.  Mason  must  have  hnd  at  least  one  experience 
in  his  life  of  the  comfort  of  being  sqaeeaad  through  the  little  end  of  the 
horn.  Yon  will  douhtless  be  treated  with  some  consideration  by  these  wor- 
thies hereafter.  In  what  school  of  blackguardism  was  Clay  of  Alabama 
graduated?  Ha  certainly  is  a  magniflcent  specimen  of  Southern  chivalTy. 
You  would  have  great  reason  to  Uiank  him  for  placing  you  in  Coventry,  at 
a  distance  beyond  hailing  ft«m  him  and  his  compeeia." 
Andrew  Ritchie,  Esq.,  of  Boston,  wrote:  — 

"These  gentlemen  have  been  unfortunsite  in  attacking  yon.  You  have 
punished  tham  hi  a  most  esemplary  manner,  without  descending  to  thair 
vulgar  level.  Yon  have  exposed  thair  Ignorance  of  our  Revolutionary  histo- 
ry,  vindicated  the  oharacter  of  your  own  State,  and  brought  forward,  to  thair 
utter  confusion,  their  own  General  Jackson,  to  juatity  yotir  remark  that  you 
would  not  voluntarily  do  anything  to  promote  the  esecutioa  of  what  yon 
deemed  an  unconstitutional  law.  In  a  word,  yon  have  taught  these  orators 
how  much  more  emotive  is  a  caaitic  dvtlu^  of  reply  than  coarse,  intemper- 
ate reviling." 

Hon,  S,  E.  Sewall,  the  constant  Abolitionist,  of  Boston,  wrote :  — 

"  It  is  hardly  necessary  for  me  to  fell  you,  what  you  probably  sea  in  tha 

newspapers,  that  yon  have  become  one  of  the  most  popular  men  in  Massa- 

clinsatts.    Even  the  Whigs  are  beginning  to  find  out  tliat  you  have  mfdn- 

tained  the  character  of  the  Stato  far  better  than  their  own  Senator. 

"  I  suppose  the  idea  of  expelling  yon  from  the  Senate,  which  was  reported 
in  the  papers  some  weeks  ago,  could  never  have  been  seriously  entcrtamed. 


■cibyGoogIc 


4^0  REPLY   TO   ASSAILANTS. 

But  the  mere  suggestion  of  sasli  an  outi'nge  roused  many  men  who  had 
iieyec  been  your  political  friands ;  for  eveiybody  felt  that  to  attempt  such  an 
Oct  would  be  on  indignity  to  the  State  not  to  be  tolenil«d. 

"  1  find  that  I  hftTe  left  to  the  end  of  my  latter,  what  I  meant  to  haye  said 
in  the  beginning,  that  all  yonr  friends  are  delighted  with  yonr  course  In 
Congress  under  the  very  tiying  circnmsiances  of  the  present  session.  We 
bU  agree  that  yon  have  fought  a  good  fight." 

municated  the  following 

"  One  gentleman  whom  I  saw  this  forenoon  said  that  he  iiivoluiitarily 
gave  three  cheers,  when  he  had  finished  reading  yonr  Bpaeoli;  and  an  'old 
Hunker '  said  to  me  smilingly,  '  1  really  don't  know  but  that  I  shall  myself 
come  out  at  last  n  Sumner  man.'  " 

Dr.  Jamea  "W.  Stoiie,  an  indefatigable  membor  of  tlte  Free-Soil  pai'ty, 

"  But  I  should  not  only  fail  to  express  my  own  feelings,  but  also  the 
universal  satisfaction  bore  ovinced,  did  I  long  delay  to  tell  you,  even  if  I 
have  time  to  do  nothing  more,  how  gi'eat  the  enthusiasm  is  in  your  behalf,  for 
yonr  noble  reply  to  the  lunvortliy  assaults  from  Pettit,  whose  name  is  more 
significant  of  his  mental  than  of  his  physical  calibre,  fi-om  Butler  the  faith- 
le5s,and  from  Clny  the  slave-huntec,  el  id  onin«  geaus.  I  doubt  whetlier 
even  you  can  repress  Hie  eutbusiasni  which  so  earnestly  demands  a  public 
reception  for  you  on  your  return  home." 

Hon.  Benjamin  T.  Butler,  afterwards  General,  aiiil  Eepresentative  in 
Congress,  wrote  :  — - 

"  My  hitereat  in  the  subject  of  the  speeches  procured  me  the  reports  while 
they  were  being  delivered.  At  that  time  I  was  at  Concoi-d,  in  court,  seeing 
people  of  all  parties;  and  I  can  assure  you,  from  observation,  that  your  oonrae 
in  the  Senate  is  sanctioned  by  tie  approving  sentiment  of  Massachusetts." 

Robert  Carter,  Esq.,  the  jonmalist  and  writer,  wrote  from  Cam- 
biidge  : — • 

"  A  month  ago  I  thought  your  popularity  had  reached  a  wondei-ftilly  high 
pilch,  that  yon  had  at  a  leap  overcome  prejudices  and  misconceptions  tliat 
aeemedliUely  to  be  surmounted  only  by  the  gradual  toil  of  years.  But  the 
last  week  has  wrought  even  greater  wonders.  Multitudes,  Ginnerly  your 
enemies  nndravilers,  are  not  merely  willing  to  tolerate  you,  not  merely  wd!- 
ing  to  be  satisfied  with  yon,  hut  have  become  actually  proud  of  yon,  as  their 
representative,  and  the  champion  of  Massachusetts  and  the  North.  I  hear 
on  all  sides  nothing  but  commendations  and  esnltntlons." 

JohnC.  Dodge,  Esq,,  of  Boston,  wrof^:  — 

"  I  rejoice  that  Massachuaetts  has  found  a  defender  who  will,  without  fear 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY  TO  ASSAILANTS.  421 

or  Rn-or,  tell  (lie  wliole  Inith,  wheu  she  U  Essailed.  And  I  aeanra  yovi  that 
such  is  the  voice  of  nearly  our  whole  coraaiuiiity.  Whigs,  Domocrata,  and 
Free-Soiiera  unite  in  the  expression  of  approbation  find  plaasura." 

Hon.  Albert  G.  Brawne,  of  Salem,  wrote  :  — 

"  Let  me  say  sei-iously.  frankly,  yoiir  repHtation  as  a  Ibarless,  btiive.  and 
true  man  is  firmly  OBtiiblished,  — confidence  iilso  in  your  discretion  and  good 
judgment,  as  shown  in  this  iast  debate  and  in  tho  manngemant  of  tliis  whole 
affair.  Thai's  is  a  settled  conviction  that  you  Itnow  how  to  withstand  tba 
entreaties  or  coolness  of  friends,  wlieii  your  thoughts  are  not  their  thouglits, 
—  that  you  have  siiown  great  moral  and  physical  courage,  united  with  ad- 
mirable ability,  in  meeting  and  discomfiting  tho  foes  of  Freedom,  when,  in 
your  opinion,  tho  rigiit  time  had  oome." 

Professor  Edward  T.  Cliauoiiig,  of  Harvard  University,  whose  mem- 
ory is  dear  to  a  large  circle  of  pupils,  wrote  to  a  friend :  — 

"  Sumner  has  done  nobly.  Ha  is  erect  and  a  mau  of  autliority  among  Hie 
slave  holders,  dealers,  and  hunters.  He  has  made  an  liistorioal  era  for  the 
North;  for  at  lenst  one  among  ns  has  dared  to  confront  the  insolent.  He 
makes  cowards  of  them,  or  rather  shows  what  cowards  they  are  at  the 
South.  So  will  it  ever  be,  when  the  Tnith  is  bold ;  though  it  is  rare  for  a 
young  or  old  haro  in  polities  to  produce  effect  so  rapidly.  Still,  and  uot- 
withstanding,  and  nevertheless,  our  Whigs  would  send  Apollyoii  to  the  Sen- 
ate as  soon  as  Sumner,  if  his  tei-m  should  exph»  when  they  are  uppermost." 

T.  C.  Connolly,  Esq.,  under  data  of  August  21,  repoi-ted  from  'Wash- 
ington the  opinion  of  Mr.  Gates,  tlie  veiy  able  editor  of  the  Nalionai 
IiiielligenceT. 

"  I  rq'oioe  in  the  assurance  universally  felt  here,  that  your  position  in  the 
Senate  will  be  far  more  pleasant  in  the  futare  than  it  has  been  in  thepast^ 
I  enjoyed  the  pleasure  of  a  conversation  with  Mr.  Galas  on  this  subject  a 
few  days  since.  He  introduced  your  name,  and  remarked  that  the  absence 
of  sympathy  hi  your  views  could  not  Influence  his  fair  judgment  of  your 
worth.  Ha  was  an  attentive  reader  of  the  debates  of  the  Senate,  and  he  had 
seen  that  every  step  you  had  taken  was  a  step  upward,  and  that  they  who 
had  affectad  to  contemn  were  at  length  driven  into  a  tacit  acknowledgment 
of  their  very  great  error.  He  spoke  in  particular  of  the  reproofs  you  had 
found  it  necessary  to  administer  to  Senators  around  you,  and  said,  that,  while 
they  were  esceedingly  severe  and  effective,  they  were  equally  just,  and  un- 
accompanied by  a  single  word  that  could  be  regarded  as  mcompatihie  with 
the  place  and  presence  in  which  you  stood." 

Men  particularly  interested  in  the  Peace  Cause  united  in  the  prerail- 
a  Representative  in  Con- 


;db,Googlc 


422  BEPLY  TO  ASSAILAKTS. 

"Your  reply  to  the  slawlioldara  Is  capital,  and  receives  universnl  nd- 
mimtion  in  tiiis  qimrter.  It  was  just  such  a  flagellation  as  tlie  slavocrata 
deserved,  and  suoh  a  one  as  thej  never  iviceived  before  in  tie  Senate.  I 
tliiuit,  fVom  what  I  can  observe,  tLat  your  course  is  universally  popular,  al- 
ways escepting  the  roercanary  minione  of  tlie  Government." 

.1.  P.  Blanchanl,  Esq.,  devofed  to  Peace,  wrote : 

"  I  take  this  occasion  to  express  my  warm  admiration  of  the  spirit  and 
power  you  have  exhibited  ia  your  late  contest  with  Messrs.  Butler,  Pettit, 
tt  id  seaus  aaiae.  I  am  rejoiced  and  grateful  that  your  '  backbone '  has 
proved  strong  enough  to  stand  suoh  a  teat  nithout  bending:  that  I  have  not 
given  you  this  acknowledgment  earlier  is  because,  being  very  busy,  I  did 
not  take  time  to  write  a  letter  for  that  purpose  only,  as  1  knew  yoa  were 
BO  well  acquainted  with  toy  sympathies  that  the  expression  of  tliem  was  un- 
necessary. I  am  glad  to  understand  that  you  have  received  commendations 
on  tins  score  from  sources  where  a  short  time  ago  you  would  not  have  ex- 
pected them." 

Elilitt  Burritt,  the  Missionaiy  of  Peace,  wrote :  — 

"  And  now  I  want  to  thank  you  with  my  whole  Iienrt  for  vonr  grand  and 
brave  r^oindec  to  Butler  and  Mason.  It  was  the  best,  braviit  tliingdonein 
the  Senate  this  many  a  year.  I  think  more  hearts  in  the  Free  States  will 
glory  in  your  courageous  and  overwhelming  reply  to  these  plantation  Sena- 
tors than  in  any  public  effort  of  yonr  life.  You  must  have  made  it,  too,  on 
short  notice.    1  never  read  anything  with  more  satiaiaotion." 

Other  letters  attest  a  change  in  sentiment  among  those  who  had  been 
lukewarm  on  Slaveiy,  end  perhaps  adverse  to  Mr.  Sumner. 

Hon.  Daniel  Shattuck,  of  Concord,  wrote :  — 

"  Being  one  of  the  old-time  Whigs,  I  whs  not  pleased  with  yonr  election 
to  the  high  seat  which  yguhold;  for  that  opinion  you  will  forgive  me,  I  am 
sure,  when  1  say  that  I  go  with  you  now  heart  and  soul,  and  approve  all  you 
have  said  in  defence  of  yonr  native  State,  whose  sons  I  know  approve  your 
course  and  wish  you  God-spaed." 

George  M.  Browne,  Esq.,  of  Boston,  wrote  :— . 

"  Differing  with  you  as  I  do  in  political  sentiments,  and  having  no  other 
eonneoUon  with  public  atfairs  tlian  what  pertains  to  every  citizen,  I  desire 
nevertheless  to  express  to  you,  what  I  believe  to  be  the  general  feeling 
among  all  chiases  of  reflecting  minds  here,  an  admiration  for  the  dignifled 
and  gentlemanly  bearing  with  which  you  have  gone  tiirough  the  contest  and 
rebuked  the  ruffian  onslaught,  —  and  to  say,  moreover,  that  we  shotdd,  I  have 
no  donbt,  nil  unite,  from  all  sides,  as  one  man,  in  sending  you  back  to  the 
Senate,  should  the  maniac  threats  of  expulsion  by  any  possibility  be  car- 
ried into  effect," 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPLY   TO  ASSAILANTS.  423 

The  following  poem,  siiggCEted  Ijy  tMs  debate,  belongs  to  tMs  Matory, 

TO  C.  S. 

I  have  seemed  more  prompt  to  censure  wrong 
Thanpraisetlieriphl,  — if  seldom  to  thine  ear 
Mj  voice  hath  mhigleil  with  the  exultant  cheer 
Borne  upon  all  our  Northern  wiiiiJe  along, — 
If  I  hftve  failed  to  join  the  fickle  throng 
In  wide-eyed  wonder  that  thou  standest  stcong 
In  victory,  surprised  in  thee  to  find 

Brougham's  scathing  power  with  Canning's  griioe  combined,— 
That  he,  for  whom  the  ninefold  Muses  sang, 
From  their  twined  arms  a  giant  athlete  sprang, 
Barbing  the  arrows  of  his  native  tongue 
With  the  spent  shafts  Latoiia's  archer  iJung, 
To  smite  the  Python  of  our  land  and  time. 
Fell  as  the  monster  born  of  Crissa's  slime, 
Lilts  the  blind  bard  who  In  Castalian  springs 
Tempered  the  st«el  that  clove  the  crest  of  kings, 
And  on  the  sht^ne  of  England's  freedom  laid 
The  gilts  of  Cumie  and  of  Delpiii's  sliade,  — 
Small  need  hast  thoit  of  words  of  praise  from  me. 
Thon  knowest  my  heart,  dear  friend,  and  well  canst  gaoss. 
That,  even  though  silent,  I  have  not  the  less 
Eejoiced  to  see  thy  actual  life  agree 
With  the  large  future  which  I  shaped  for  thee, 
When,  years  ago,  beside  the  summer  sea, 
White  in  the  moon,  we  saw  the  long  waves  f^ 
BafHed  and  broken  from  the  rocky  wall. 
That  to  the  menace  of  the  brawling  flood 
Opposed  alone  its  massive  quietude, 
Calm  as  a  fate,  with  not  a  leaf  nor  vine 
Mot  birch-spray  trembling  in  the  still  moonshine, 
Crowning  it  like  God's  peace.    I  sometimes  think 
That  night-scene  by  the  sea  prophetical, 
(For  Nature  speaks  in  symbols  and  in  signs. 
And  through  her  pictures  human  fate  divines,)  — 
That  rock,  wheretVom  we  saw  the  billows  sink 
In  murmnring  rout,  uprising  clear  and  tail 
In  the  white  light  of  heaven,  the  type  of  one 
Who,  momently  by  Error's  host  assailed, 
Stands  strong  as  Truth,  in  greaves  of  granite  mailed, 
And,  tranquil-fronted,  listening  over  all 
The  tumnit,  bears  the  angels  say,  Well  done  1 

J.  G.  W, 
UlA  month,  iBth,  1664. 


■cibyGoogIc 


PEACEFUL  OPPOSITION  TO  THE  rUGITITE 
SLAVE  ACT. 

Letter  to  the  Mayor  of  Boston,  foh  the  Celebeation 
JuLV  4,  1854. 


Senate  Chamber,  1st  July,  1854. 

DEAE  SLR,  —  I  have  been  honored  by  the  invita- 
tion of  the  municipal  authorities  of  Boston  to  unite 
with  them  in  commemorating  the  approaching  anniver- 
sary of  our  N^ational  Independence. 

Please  tender  to  them  ray  gratitude,  that  they  have 
thus  remembered  me,  an  absent  citizen,  who  tries  to 
serve  truth  and  justice  in  the  sphere  where  he  has  been 
placed.  Pleasure  would  take  me  home  among  con- 
genial souls,  but  duty  keeps  me  here. 

The  approaching  anniversary  of  Independence  in  Bos- 
ton should  he  something  more  than  a  show  and  expense. 
It  ought  to  be  the  ocfeasion  of  a  practical  vow  to  those 
primal  principles  of  Freedom  which  have  been  assailed. 
Our  municipal  history  should  be  carefuUy  read,  and,  un- 
less we  are  prepared  to  disown  our  fathers,  the  conduct 
of  Boston  at  memorable  times  should  be  set  forward 
anew,  as  an  example  which  her  children  must  never 
forget.  I  do  not  refer  to  the  violent  act  by  which  her 
harbor  was  converted  into  a  "  teapot " ;  but  I  would 
especially  dwell  on  the  peaceful  opposition,  -which,  ac- 
cording to  her  own  records,  now  preserved  at  the  City 
HaU,  she  organized  against  a  tyrannical  and  uuconstitu- 


■cibyGoogIc 


PEACEFUL  OPPOSITION  TO  FUGITIVE   9LAYB  ACT.      425 

tional  Act  of  Parliament,  —  "  tearing  testimony  against 
outrageous  tumults  and  illegal  proceedings,"  but  never 
failing  to  "  take  legal  and  warrantable  measures  to  pre- 
vent that  misfortune,  of  all  others  the  most  to  be  dreaded, 
the  execution  of  the  Stamp  Act."  The  City  Clerk  will 
find  these  words  in  his  books,  under  date  of  24th  March, 
1766,  whence  I  have  with  my  own  hand  copied  them. 
With  this  great  precedent  of  Freedom  in  my  memory, 
I  ask  the  municipal  authorities  —  should  I  be  remem- 
bered at  their  hospitable  board  —  to  propose  in  my 
name  the  following  sentiment. 

Th6  CUy  of  Boston. — While  still  in  colonial  dependi 
and  with  no  aim  at  revolution,  her  municipal  fathers  stead- 
fastly opposed  the  execution,  within  her  borders,  of  ai 
conatitutional  and  tyrannical  Act  of  Pariiament,  until,  with- 
out violence  or  collision,  it  was  at  first  practically  annulled, 
and  at  last  repealed,  Tndy  honoring  the  Fathers,  let  Boston 
not  depart  from  their  esamplo. 

I  remain,  dear  Sir,  your  faithful  servant, 

Chaeles  Sumnek. 
To  THE  Mayor  or  Boston. 


■cibyGoogIc 


NO  PESSION  FOR  SEEVICE  IN  SUPPORT  OF 
THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT. 

MiNOKiTr  Report  to  the  Senate  Of  the  Uhited  States,  on  tre 

BlLI,    0HAST1NO    TO    THE   WlDOW    OF    JaUES    BaTCHELDEB  i   PhO- 
YISION   rOB   UEB   FUTURE    SuPPOBT,    J"ULY  13,  1854. 


An  attempt  was  made  to  obtain  a  pension  for  tlie  widow  of  James 
Bafcheldei-,  killed  in  Boston,  while  guarding  Anthony  Bums,  the  fugi- 
tive slave,  on  the  evening  of  May  26,  18Bi.  A  bill  was  reported  from 
the  Committee  on  Pensions.  Mr.  Sumner  and  Mr.  Seward,  constitut- 
ing a  minority  of  the  Committee,  made  the  following  adverse  report, 
wUch  was  drawn  up  by  the  former. 


TIEW8  OF  MR.  StIMNER  AB"D  MR.  SEWARD. 

THE  nndersigned,  a  minority  of  the  Committee  on 
Pensions,  cannot  concur  with  the  majority  of  the 
Committee  in  reportir^  a  bill  for  the  relief  of  the  widow 
of  the  late  James  Batchelder.  They  also  dissent  from 
the  report  accompanying  the  till,  which,  however,  is 
understood  not  to  proceed  from  a  majority  of  the  Com- 
mittee. 

In  granting  pensions,  or  bounties  of  a  kindred  na- 
ture, it  has  been  the  habit  of  the  Committee  to  require 
evidence  of  all  essential  facts  and  circumstances, —  not, 
indeed,  according  to  the  r^rous  forms  of  a  court  of 
law,  but  with  substantial  fulness  and  authenticity.  Ap- 
plications for  pensions  are  constantly  rejected  for  de- 


■cibyGooglc 


NO  PENSION  FOR  SUPPORT  OP  PCGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.    427 

feet  of  testimony.  But  this  reasonable  practice,  whieli 
is  a  necessary  safeguard  against  abuse,  has  been  dis- 
regarded in  the  present  case.  Bo  evidence  of  any  kind 
—  not  a  shred  or  particle  —  was  produced.  The  ma- 
jority of  the  Committee  undertook  to  act  at  once,  on 
loose  and  general  report,  gathered  from  the  public  press 
at  a  moment  of  excitement.  In  this  report  they  have 
obviously  proceeded  with  more  haste  than  discretion. 
Such  a  course  cannot  be  in  conformity  with  approved 
precedents.  In  itself  it  will  be  a  bad  precedent  for  the 
future. 

But  this  proceeding  seems  more  obnoxious  to  com- 
ment, when  it  is  known  that  it  appears,  from  the  very 
sources  on  which  the  Committee  rehed,  that  the  facts  in 
question  are  all  at  this  moment  the  subject  of  judicial 
inquiiy,  still  ^Tiding,  in  the  courts  at  Boston.  Several 
citizens  have  been  indicted  for  participation  in  the  trans- 
action to  which  reference  is  made,  and  in  which  Batch- 
elder  is  said  to  have  been  killed.  Their  trials  have  not 
yet  taken  place,  but  are  near  at  hand.  Under  these 
pectdiar  circumstances,  the  indiscreet  haste  of  the  Com- 
mittee, thus  acting  in  advance  of  authentic  evidence, 
and  lite  pendente,  is  enhanced  by  possible  detriment  to 
the  grave  interests  of  justice,  which  all  will  admit 
should  not  be  exposed  to  partisan  influence  from  abroad. 
The  report  accompanying  the  bUl,  without  any  aid  from 
human  testimony,  undertakes  to  pronounce  dogmati- 
cally on  facts  which  will  be  in  issue  on  these  trials. 
Anticipating  the  court,  and  literally  without  a  hearing, 
it  gives  judgment  on  absent  persons,  as  well  as  on  dis- 
tant events. 

On  grounds  irrespective  of  the  merits  of  the  case,  the 
1  object  to  any  action  upon  it  on  the  pres- 


■cibyGooglc 


428  NO   PENSION  FOR   SEEVICE  IN   SUPPORT 

ent  evidence,  and  in  the  existing  state  of  things.  They 
object  for  two  reasona :  first,  that  such  action  would 
become  a  bad  precedent,  opening  the  way  to  a  disre- 
gard of  evidence  in  the  distribution  of  pensions  and 
bounties ;  and,  secondly/,  that  it  would  be  an  interfer- 
ence—  offensive,  tliough  indirect — with  the  adminis- 
tration of  justice,  in  matters  stUl  pending,  and  involv- 
ing the  fortunes  of  several  citizens.  These  reasons  are 
ample. 

But  on  other  grounds,  of  a  different  character,  and  vi- 
tal to  the  merits  of  the  case,  the  undersigoed  must  dis- 
sent from  the  majority  of  the  Committee. 

Eegardii^  the  Act  of  Congress  usually  known  as  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Act  as  unconstitutional,  while  it  is  justly 
condemned  by  the  moral  sense  of  the  communities  where 
it  is  sought  to  be  enforced,  the  undersigned  are  not  dis- 
posed to  recc^ize  any  services  rendered  in  its  enforce- 
ment as  meritorious  in  character.  Especially  are  they 
unwilling  to  depart  beyond  the  clear  line  of  precedent, 
in  voting  boimties  on  account  of  such  services.  This 
of  itself  is  sufficient  reason  for  opposition  to  the  pro- 
posed bill 

But  admitting  for  the  moment  the  asserted  constitu- 
tionality of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  and  its  conformity 
with  just  principles  of  duty,  and  admitting  further,  that 
efforts  for  its  enforcement  are  to  be  placed  in  the  same 
scale  with  efforts  to  enforce  other  Acts  of  Coi^ress,  of 
acknowledged  constitutionality,  and  clear  conformity 
with  jast  principles  of  duty,  then  the  undersigned  beg 
leave  to  submit,  that,  according  to  the  practice  of  our 
country,  such  efforts  have  not  been  considered  as  en- 
titled to  the  ordinary  reward  of  pensions  or  kindred 
bounties. 


■cibyGoogIc 


OF   THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT,  429 

The  pensions  and  kindred  Tjounties  of  our  country  have 
been  founded  exclusively  on  military  and  Tiaval  services. 
In  England,  civil  services,  -whetlier  on  the  bench,  in  di- 
plomacy, or  in  the  departments  of  State,  are  subjects  of 
pension;  but  it  is  otherwise  here.  With  us  there  are 
no  general  laws  to  this  end ;  nor  are  there  special  laws 
of  such  clear  meaning  and  character  as  to  become  prece- 
dentSj  sanctioning  pensions  or  bounties  for  civil  service. 
A  report  of  this  Committee,  made  by  its  Chairman  at 
this  very  session  of  Congress,  states  the  rule  and  prac- 
tice of  Congress.     Here  is  the  whole  report. 

"  IH   THE    SENATE    OF    THE   UXITED    STATES. 

"April  II,  1854,  —  Ordered  to  be  printed. 

"  Mr.  Jones,  of  Iowa,  made  the  following  report. 

"  T?ie  Committee  cm  Pensions,  to  wJhom  was  re/erred  the  petition 

of  RAecca  Bright,  heg  leave  to  report: — 

"  That  the  petitioner  is  the  widow  of  Jacob  Bright,  an 

armorer,  who  was  killed  at  the  navy-yard  in  this  city  by  the 

bursting  of  a  shell.     He  heing  an.  employee  of  the  Oovemment, 

and  in.  no  sense  to  be  regarded  as  in  its  'military  or  naval 

service,'  the  Committee  can  find  no  reason,  founded  in  law  or 

justice,  for  pensioning  his  widow.     Her  case  is  precisely  that 

of  the  widow  of  a  laborer  or  aiechanic  employed  by  the  day 

or  month  upon  any  public  work.    They  therefore  recommend 

that  the  prayer  of  the  petitioner  be  rejected,'" 

And  yet,  in  the  very  teeth  of  this  recommendation, 
made  by  themselves  at  this  very  session,  the  Committee 
now  propose  to  bestow  a  bounty  upon  such  services. 
If  the  Committee  were  right  in  their  former  report,  they 
cannot  be  right  now. 

1  Reports  oTthe  Committoae  of  the  SfiDate,  33cl  Cong.  Ist  Soaa.,  No.  199. 


■cibyGoogIc 


430  NO  PENSIOS  FOR   SERVICE  IN   SUPPORT 

The  report  accompanying  the  bill  shows  that  three 
of  the  Committee  have  felt  that  their  reeommendatiou 
needed  the  support  of  precedents,  and  they  have  ran- 
sacked the  records  for  them,     Two  only  are  produced. 

The  first  is  an  Act  of  Congress,  bearing  date  June  7, 
1794,  which  provides  "  that  the  swm  of  two  thousand 
dollars  he  allowed  to  the  widow  of  Eobert  I'orsyth, 
late  marshal  of  the  district  of  Georgia,  for  the  use  of 
herself  and  the  children  of  the  said  Robert  Forsyth." 
On  search  in  the  office  of  the  Secretary  of  the  Senate, 
■where  this  bill  originated,  and  also  at  the  Treasury, 
where  the  money  was  paid,  no  papers  have  been  found 
showing  the  occasion  of  this  grant ;  nor  has  anybody 
undertaken  to  state  any.  This  precedent,  then,  can  be 
of  little  value  in  establishing  an  important  rule  in  the 
dispensation  of  national  bounties. 

The  only  other  precedent  adduced  by  the  Committee 
is  an  Act  bearing  date  May  8,  1820,  providing  "that 
the  Postmaster-General  be,  and  he  hereby  is,  author- 
ized and  directed  to  pay  to  the  widow  of  John  Heaps, 
late  of  the  city  of  Baltimore,  —  who,  while  employed 
as  a  carrier  of  the  mail  of  the  Unit-ed  States,  and 
having  the  said  mail  in  his  custody,  was  beset  by 
ruffians  and  murdered,  —  out  of  the  money  belong- 
ing to  the  United  States,  arising  from  the  postage  of 
letters  and  packets,  five  hundred  doUars  in  ten  equal 
semiannual  payments."  On  this  precedent  Congress 
will  surely  hesitate  to  estabhsh  a  rule  which  wUl  open 
a  new  dram  upon  the  country. 

The  general  laws  do  not  award  pensions  or  boun- 
ties for  services  in  enforcing  the  revenue  laws  of 
the  country;  and  it  is  not  known  that  any  special 
acts  have  ever  been  passed  rewarding  such  services, 


■cibyGoogIc 


01'    THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  431 

though  they  have  often  heen  rendeTed  at  imminent 
■  danger  to  life,  as  well  from  shipwreck  as  from  the  vio- 
lence of  smu^lera.  The  proposed  bill  will  be  an  apt 
precedent  for  hounty  iii  this  large  class  of  cases;  and 
it  may  properly  be  opposed  by  all  who  are  not  ready 
for  a  new  batch  of  claimants. 

The  undersigned  venture  to  make  a  single  comment 
further  on  the  report  accompanying  the  bill.  This  re- 
port, not  content  witli  assigning  reasons  for  its  proposed 
boimty,  proceeds  to  take  cognizance  of  the  conduct  of 
the  people  of  Massachusetts,  the  citizens,  the  soldiers,  the 
marshal  and  his  deputies,  the  mayor  and  police  of  Bos- 
ton, in  the  recent  transaction,  and  assumes  to  hold  the 
scales  of  judgment.  In  this  respect  it  evinces  an  indis- 
creet haste,  similar  to  tliat  already  displayed  in  acting 
on  the  present  proposition,  without  authentic  evidence, 
and  during  the  pendency  of  judicial  investigations.  It 
appears  from  the  public  journals,  out  of  which  all  our  in- 
formation on  this  matter  is  derived,  that  the  conduct  of 
several  public  functionaries,  on  this  occasion,  'in  Mas- 
sachusetts, has  been  seriously  drawn  in  question.  The 
marshal  of  the  district  is  openly  charged  with  making  ■ 
the  arrest  of  the  alleged  fugitive  under  the  fraudulent 
pretence  that  he  was  a  criminal,  —  a  scandalous  device, 
which  no  honest  man  can  regard  without  reprobation. 
The  mayor  of  Boston  is  also  openly  charged  with  viola- 
tion of  the  primal  principles  of  free  institutions  and  of 
the  law  of  the  land,  in  surrendering  the  city  for  the 
time  being  into  the  possession  of  a  military  force,  and 
thus  establishii^  there  that  supremacy  of  arms  under 
which  all  law  is  silent.  But  on  these  things  the  under- 
signed express  no  opinion.  They  desire  only  to  with- 
hold all  assent  from  the  blindfold  ratification  which  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


432     NO  PENSION  FOE  SUPPORT  OF  PUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT. 

report  accompanying  the  IdlU  volunteers,  without  reason 
or  occasion,  to  the  conduct  of  public  ftmctionaries,  as 
well  aa  of  others,  who,  according  to  some  evidence,  may 
have  acted  very  badly. 

Chaeles  Sumxee. 

William  H.  Seward. 


■cibyGoogIc 


JAMES  OTIS  AN  EXAMPLE  TO  MASSACHDSETTS. 


Senate  Chamber,  July  30,  1854. 

DEAE  SIE,  —  I  have  been  honored  hy  the  Cape  Cod 
Association  with  an  invitation  to  unite  with  them 
in  their  approaching  festival  at  Yarmouth. 

Amidst  these  unprecedented  heats  it  is  pleasant  mere- 
ly to  think  of  the  seaside ;  much  pleasanter  would  it  be 
to  taste  for  a  day  its  salt,  refreshing  air,  especially  with 
cherished  friends,  and  stirred  by  historical  memories,  in 
these  times  bracing  to  the  soul  But  my  duties  will 
keep  me  here. 

In  that  part  of  Massachusetts  to  which  you  invite  me 
was  bom  James  Otis,  one  of  our  immortal  names.  He 
early  saw  the  beauty  of  Liberty,  and  in  those  struggles 
which  preceded  the  Revolution  gave  his  eloquent  tongue 
to  her  support.  To  the  tyrannical  Writs  of  Assistance, 
offspring  of  sovereign  power,  and  at  that  day  regarded 
as  constitutional,  he  offered  inflexible  resistance,  saying, 
"I  will  to  my  dying  day  oppose,  with  aU  the  powers 
and  faculties  God  has  given  me,  aU  such  instruments  of 
slavery  on  the  one  hand  and  villany  on  the  other.  I 
cheerfully  submit  myself  to  every  odious  name  for  con- 
:e.     Let  the  consequences  be  what  they  will. 


■cibyGoogIc 


434      JAMES    OTIS   AN    KXAMFLK   TO   MASSACHUSETTS. 

I  am  determined  to  proceed."  And  then  again  he  de- 
clared of  this  outrageous  procesg  "  It  is  a  power  that 
places  the  liberty  of  every  man  in  the  hands  of  every 
petty  officer,"  With  this  precision  he  struck  at  an  en- 
ffine  of  tyranny,  and  with  fervid  eloquence  exposed  it  to 
mankind.  Sucli  a  chai'acter  should  not  be  forgotten  at 
your  commemoration.  Were  I  there,  I  m^ht  ask  leave 
to  propose  the  following  sentiment. 

The  memari/  of  James  Otis,  of  Barmtahle,  the  early  orator 
of  American  Liberty.  —  Maseuchusetts  cherishes  the  fame  of 
her  patriot  child.     Let  her  also  imitate  his  virtues. 

I  remain,  dear  Sir,  very  faithfully  yours, 

CliAELES    SUMNEE. 

To    THE    ChAIEMAH    OF   THE   COMMITTEE, 


■cibyGoogIc 


STRUGGLE  FOE  REPEAL  OF  THE  EDGITIVE 
SLAVK  ACT. 

Debate  in  tee  Senate,  July  31,  1854. 


All  efforts  of  the  friends  of  Freedom  in  Congress  eiiMuntered  op- 
position at  every  stsge.  Attempts  by  John  Quiney  Adama  to  present 
petitions  were  thwarted  in  every  way  that  vindietive  rage  could 
prompt.  Propositions  for  the  repeal  of  obnoxiona  laws  anataining 
Slaveiy  were  stifled.  To  aeeomplish  this  result,  pai-liamentary  cour- 
tesy and  parliamentary  law  were  both  set  at  defiance.  On  a  former 
oeoaaion,!  when  Mr.  Snnmer  brought  forward  his  motion  for  the  repeal 
of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  he  was  refused  a  hearing,  and  obtained  it 
only  by  taking  advantage  of  the  Civil  and  Diplomatic  Appropriation 
Bin,  and  moving  an  amendment  to  it,  which  no  parliamentary  subtlety 
,  or  audacity  could  declare  to  be  out  of  order.  On  the  presentation  of 
petitions  against  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  from  time  to  time,  he  was 
met  by  similar  cheeks.  Meanwhile  anything  for  Slavery  was  always  in 
order.     An  experience  of  a  suigle  day  will  show  something  of  this. 

On  the  Slst  of  July,  185*,  Mr.  Seward,  of  New  York,  under  inatmcT 
tions  from  the  Committee  on  Pensions,  reported  a  bill,  which  had 
ali'eady  passed  the  House  of  Representatives,  for  the  relief  of  Betsey 
Nash,  a  poor  and  aged  woman,  whose  husband  had  died  of  wounds 
received  in  the  war  of  1812,  and  asked  for  its  immediate  consideration. 
Tills  simple  measure,  demanded  by  obvious  justice,  was  at  once  enibar^ 
raased  by  an  incongruous  proposition  for  the  support  of  Slavery.  Mr. 
Adams,  of  Mississippi,  moved,  as  an  amendment,  another  bill,  for  the 
relief  of  Mrs.  Batehelder,  widow  of  a  person  killed  in  Boston,  while 
aiding  as  a  volunteer  in  the  enforcement  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act. 
In  the  fece  of  various  objections  this  amendment  was  adopted.  Mr. 
Sumner  at  once  followed  by  a  proposition  in  the  following  words ;  — 

"Provided,  That  the  Act  of  Congress,  approved  September  18,  1850, 
for  the  surrender  of  fogitives  from  service  or  labor,  he,  and  the  same 
is  hereby,  repealed." 

\  See  ante,  p.  80. 


;db,Googlc 


436  STRUGGLE  FOE  EEPEAL   OF 

This  was  ruled  out  of  order,  as  "  not  germane  to  the  bill  under  con- 
sideintiou  "  ;  and  the  two  bills,  hitahud  togeflcr,  —  one  for  a  militai'y 
pension,  and  the  other  for  contribution  to  the  widow  of  tt  Slave- 
Hunter,  —  were  put  on  their  parage.  Mr.  Sumner  then  epntng  for 
the  iioor,  when  ft  atru^e  ensued,  which  is  minutely  reported  in  the 
Cmgressioiial  Olobe.  The  careful  reader  will  observe,  that,  in  order  to 
out  ofi'  an  effort  to  repeal  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  at  least  two  mic[uos- 
tionable  nUea  of  parUameiitaty  law  were  overturned. 

ME.  SUMNER.  In  pnisuance  of  notice,  I  now 
ask  leave  to  introduce  a  bill. 

Mh.  Stuabx  (of  Michigan).  I  object  to  it,  and  move 
to  take  up  the  River  and  Harbor  BilL 

The  Presiding  Officer  (Mr.  Coopkr,  of  Pennsyl- 
vania). The  other  bill  is  not  disposed  of.  The  third 
reading  of  a  Bill  for  the  relief  of  Betsey  Nash. 

The  bdl  was  then  read  a  third  time  and  passed, 

Mk.  Sumnee,  In  pursuance  of  notice,  I  ask  leave  to 
introduce  a  biU,  which  I  now  send  to  the  table. 

Mr.  Stuart.     Is  that  in  order  ? 

Mr,  Sumner,    Why  nob  ? 

Mr.  Benjamin  (of  Louisiana).  There  is  a  pending 
motion  of  the  Senator  from  Michigan  to  take  up  the 
River  and  Harbor  BiU. 

The  Presiding  Officer.  That  motion  was  not  en- 
tertained, because  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  had 
and  has  the  iloor. 

Mr.  Stuart.     I  make  the  motion  now. 

The  Presiding  Officer,  The  Chair  thinks  it  is  in 
order  to  give  the  notice. 

Mr.  Sumner.  Notice  has  been  given,  and  I  now,  in 
pursuance  of  notice,  introduce  the  biU.  The  question 
is  on  its  first  reading. 

The  Presiding  Officer.    The  first  reading  of  a  biU. 

Mb.  Norris  (of  New  Hampshire).  I  rise  to  a  ques- 
tion of  order. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  437 

Mk.  Sumner.     I  believe  I  liave  the  floor. 

Mb.  Noeris.  Bub  I  rise  to  a  q^uestion  of  order.  I 
submit  that  that  is  not  the  question.  The  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  has  given  notice  that  he  would  aak  leave 
to  introduce  a  bill.  He  now  asks  that  leave.  If  there 
be  objection,  the  question  must  be  decided  by  the  Sen- 
ate whether  be  shall  have  leave  or  not.  Objection  is 
made,  and  the  bill  cannot  be  read. 

Mr.  Sumner.  Very  well ;  the  first  question,  then,  is 
on  granting  leave,  and  the  title  of  the  bill  will  be  read. 

Thk  Presiding  Officee  (to  the  Secretary).  Bead 
the  title. 

The  Secretary  read  it  as  follows;  "A  Bill  to  repeal 
the  Act  of  Congress  approved  September  18,  1850,  for 
the  surrender  of  fugitives  from  service  or  labor," 

The  Presiding  OFFrcER.  The  question  is  on  grant- 
ing leave  to  introduce  the  bill. 

Mr.  Sumner.    And  I  have  the  floor. 

The  Presiding  Officer.  The  Senator  from  Massa- 
chusetts is  entitled  to  the  floor. 

Me.  Sumner.  I  shall  not  occupy  much  time,  nor 
shall  I  debate  the  bill  Some  time  ago,  Mr.  President, 
after  tlie  presentation  of  the  Memorial  from  Boston, 
signed  by  twenty-nine  hundred  citizens  without  dis- 
tinction of  party,  I  gave  notice  that  I  should,  at  a  day 
thereafter,  ask  leave  to  introduce  a  bill  for  the  repeal 
of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act.  Desirous,  however,  not  to 
proceed  prematurely,  I  awaited  the  action  of  the  Com- 
mittee on  the  Judiciary,  to  which  the  Memorial,  and 
others  of  a  similar  eliaraeter,  were  referred.  At  length 
an  adverse  report  was  made,  and  accepted  by  the  Sen- 
ate. From  tlie  time  of  that  report  down  to  this  mo- 
ment, I  have  sought  an  opportunity  to  introduce  this 


■cibyGoogIc 


438  STRUGGLE   FOE   REPEAL  OF 

bill.  Now,  at  last,  I  have  it,  At  a  former  session, 
Sir,  in  intvoduciog  a  similar  proposition,  I  considered  it 
at  length,  in  an  argument  -which  I  fearlessly  assert 

Me.  Gwin  (of  California).  I  rise  to  a  point  of  order. 
Has  the  Senator  a  right  to  dehate  the  cLiiestion,  or  say 
anything  on  it,  until  leave  be  granted  1 

The  Peesiding  Officer,  My  impression  is  that  the 
question  is  not  debatable.^ 

Me.  Sumner.  I  propose  simply  to  explain  my  bill, 
—  to  make  a  statement,  not  an  argument. 

Me.  Gwin.     I  make'  the  point  of  order. 

The  Peesiding  Officee.  I  am  not  aware  precisely 
what  the  rule  of  order  on  the  subject  is ;  but  I  have  the 
impression  that  the  Senator  cannot  debate  — — 

Me.  Sumnbe.     The  distinction  is  this 

Me.  Gwin.  I  insist  upon  the  application  of  the  de^ 
cision  of  the  Chair. 

Mk.  Mason  (of  Vi^nia).  Mr.  President,  there  is  one 
rule  of  order  that  is  undoubted :  that,  when  the  Chair  is 
stating  a  question  of  order,  he  must  not  be  interrapted 
by  a  Senator,  There  is  no  question  about  that  rule  of 
order. 

The  Presiding  Officee.  The  Senator  did  not  in- 
terrupt the  Chair. 

Mr,  Sumneb,  The  Chair  does  me  justice  in  resjtonse 
to  the  injustice  of  the  Senator  from  Viiginia. 

The  Presiding  OrncER.     Order !  order ! 

Mr,  Mason.  The  Senator  is  doing  that  very  thing  at 
this  moment,  I  am  endeavoring  to  sustain  the  authori- 
ty of  the  Chair,  -which  certednly  has  been  violated. 

1  Notliing  is  oleiiKr,  undar  the  rules  of  the  Senate,  than  that  Mr,  Sumner 
WHS  in  order,  when,  on  introdnchig  his  bill,  he  proceeded  to  state  the  cansea 


;db,Googlc 


TUE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  439 

The  Presidiho  OpncEE,  It  is  the  opinion  of  the 
Chair  that  the  debate  is  out  of  order,  I  am  not  pre- 
cisely infovmed  of  what  the  rule  is ;  but  such  is  my 
clear  impression. 

Mk.  Walkee  (of  Wisconsin),  If  the  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  will  aJlow  me,  I  will  say  a  word  here, 

Mr.  Sumner.     Certainly. 

Mr,  Walker.  It  is  usual,  upon  notice  being  given 
of  intention,  to  ask  leave  to  introduce  a  biU.  The  bQl 
is  sent  to  the  Chair,  and  it  is  taken  as  a  matter  of  course 
that  the  Senator  asking  it  has  leave.  But  in  this  instance, 
differing  from  the  usual  practice,  objection  has  been 
made  to  leave  being  gi-anted.  The  necessity  is  unposed, 
tlien,  of  taking  the  sense  of  the  Senate  on  granting  leave 
to  the  Senator  to  introduce  his  bill.  That,  then,  be- 
comes the  question.  The  question  for  the  Chair  to  put 
is.  Shall  the  Senator  have  leave  ? 

The    Presiding  Officer.     That  was  the  question 


Mr.  Walker.  Now,  Sir,  it  does  seem  to  me  that 
it  is  proper,  and  that  it  is  in  order,  for  the  Senator  to 
address  himself  to  the  Senate,  with  the  view  of  show- 
ing the  propriety  of  granting  the  leave  asked  for.  -  He 
has  a  right  to  show  that  there  would  be  propriety  on  the 
part  of  the  Senate  in  granting  the  leave.  I  think,  there- 
fore, as  this  may  become  a  precedent  in  future  in  regard 
to  other  matters,  that  it  should  be  settled  with  some 
degree  of  deliberation. 

Mr.  Gwin.     Let  the  Chair  decide  the  question. 

The  Pkesidisg  Officer.  The  Chair  has  decided 
that  debate  was  not  in  order,  in  his  opinion. 

Me.  Sumner.  From  that  decision  of  the  Chair  I 
most  respectfully  take  an  appeal. 


■cibyGoogIc 


440  STRUGGLE   FOK  REPEAL  OF 

The  Presiuing  Officer.  From  that  ruling  of  the 
Chair  an  appeal  is  taken  by  the  Senator  from  Massa- 
chusetts.    The  q^ueation  is  on  the  appeal. 

Mr.  Benjamin.  In  order  to  put  a  stop  to  the  whole 
debate,  I  move  to  lay  the  appeal  on  the  table.  That  is 
a  motion  which  is  not  debatable. 

Mr.  Sumker.     Is  that  motion  in  order  ? 

The  Presiding  Officer.    Certainly  it  is  in  order.^ 

Mr.  Weller  (of  California).  I  desire  to  make  one 
remark  in  r^ard  to  the  rule. 

The  Presiding  Officer.  It  is  not  in  order  now. 
The  CLuestion  must  be  taken  withoiit  debate. 

Mr.  Sumnee.  Allow  me  to  state  the  case  as  it  seems 
to  me.  I  was  on  the  floor,  andyielded  it  to  the  Senator 
from  Wisconsin  strictly  for  the  purpose  of  an  explana- 
tion. When  he  finished,  I  was  in  possession  of  the  floor ; 
and  then  it  was  that  the  Senator  from  Louisiana,  on  my 
right 

The  Presiding  Officer.  Will  the  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  give  leave  to  the  Chair  to  explain  ? 

Mr.  Sumner.     Certainly. 

The  Presiding  Officer.  A  point  of  order  was  made 
by  the  Senator  from  California  [Mr.  Gwin],  that  debate 
was  not  in  order  upon  the  question  of  granting  leave ; 
and  the  Chair  so  decided.  The  Senator  from  Massachu- 
setts then  lost  the  floor,  as  I  apprehend,  and  he  certain- 
ly did  by  following  it  up  by  an  appeal  After  that  he 
could  go  no  further.  He  lost  the  floor  then  again  for  a 
second  time,  and  then  it  was  that  the  Senator  from  Louis- 

I  Tha  motion  waa  olaariy  out  of  order ;  first,  becnuse  in  the  Senate  an  appenl 
IVoni  the  dedsion  of  the  Chnir  on  n  question  of  oi'der  cannot  be  laid  on  the 
tnble:  and,  secondly,  becauno  Mr.  Sumner  was  ahready  on  the  floor,  so  that 
Mr.  Benjamin  conld  not  make  a  motion. 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  441 

iaiia  intervened  witli  another  motion,  wliicli  is  certainly 
in  order,  to  lay  the  appeal  on  the  table.  That  is  not 
debatable.     This,  it  seeing  to  me,  is  the  state  of  the  case. 

Me,  CnASE  (of  Ohio).  Will  the  Chair  allow  me  to 
make  a  single  statement? 

The  Presiding  Officer.    Certainly. 

Mr.  Chase.  The  Senator  from  Massachusetts  rose 
and  held  the  floor  during  the  suggestion  made  to  the 
Chair  by  the  Senator  from  Wisconsin.  The  Chair  then, 
after  the  Senator  from  Wisconsin  had  finished  his  sug- 
gestion, declared  his  opinion  to  be,  notwithstanding  the 
suggestion,  that  debate  was  not  in  order.  The  Senator 
from  Massachusetts  then  took  an  appeal,  and  retained 
the  floor  for  the  purpose  of  addressing  tlie  Senate  on 
that  appeal  While  he  occupied  the  floor,  the  Senator 
from  Louisiana  rose  and  moved  to  lay  the  appeal  upon 
the  table.     That  will  be  borne  out  by  the  gentlemen 


The  Presiding  Officer.  That  is  so ;  but  the  Chair 
does  not  understand  that  debate  was  in  oider  on  the 
appeal  The  appeal  was  to  be  decided  without  debate, 
and  therefore  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  neces- 
sarily lost  the  floor  after  he  took  the  appeal. 

Mr.  Bell  {of  Tennessee).  I  would  inquire  whether 
there  is  not  a  bill  ah-eady  pending  for  the  repeal  of  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Law  ? 

The  Presiding  Officer.  I  have  not  inquired  of  the 
Seetetary,  but  it  is  my  belief  there  is  a  similar  biU 
pending ;  but  it  was  not  on  that  ground  the  Chan  made 
this  ruling. 

Mr.  Bell.  I  would  inquire  whether  there  is  not 
such  a  bill  pending?  Did  not  the  lionorable  Senator 
from  Ohio  some  time  ago  brii^  in  such  a  bill? 


■cibyGoogIc 


442  STRUGGLE   FOR   REPEAL   OP 

Me.  Weller,     I  think  he  did. 

Me.  Chase.     Ko,  Sir. 

Mr.  Bell.     Then  I  am  mistaken. 

Me.  Chase.     My  bill  is  not  on  that  subject. 

The  Pkesiding  Officee.  The  question  is  on  the 
motion  of  the  Senator  from  Louisiana,  to  lay  on  the 
table  the  appeal  taken  by  the  Senator  from  Massachu- 
setts from  the  decision  of  the  Chair. 

Mk  Chase.  I  ask  if  the  motion  of  the  Senator  from 
Louisiana  is  in  order,  when  the  Senator  from  Massachu- 
setts retained  the  floor  for  the  purpose  of  debating  the 
appeal  ? 

Mr.  Benjamin,  The  Senator  is  not  in  order  in  re- 
newing that  question,  which  has  already  been  decided 
by  the  Chair; 

The  Presiding  Officek.  If  the  Chair  acted  under 
an  erroneous  impression  in  supposii^  that  debate  on  the 
appeal  was  not  in  order,  when  it  actually  is,  it  was  the 
fault  of  the  Chair,  and  it  would  not  have  been  in  order 
for  the  Senator  from  Louisiana  to  make  the  motion 
which  he  did  make,  wliilo  tho  Senator  from  Massachu- 
setts was  on  the  floor.  But  tlie  Chair  recognized  the 
Senator  from  Louisiana,  supposing  that  the  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  had  yielded  the  floor.  The  Senator  had 
taken  an  appeal ;  he  followed  it  up  by  no  address  to  the 
Chait,  indicating  an  intention  that  be  intended  to  de- 
bate the  appeal,  or  the  Chair  certainly  should  so  far 
have  recognized  hini.  But  the  Cliair  would  reconsider 
his  ruling  in  that  respect,  with  the  consent  of  the  Sen- 
ator from  Louisiana. 

Me.  Bright  (of  Indiana).  The  Chair  will  permit  me 
to  suggest  that  I  tliink  the  motion  proper  to  be  enter- 
tained now  is  the  one  proposed  by  the  Senator  from 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE   FUGITIVE  SLAVE   ACT.  443 

New  Hampshire  [Mr.  Korris].  The  Senator  from  Mas- 
sachusetts presented  his  bill ;  the  Senator  from  New- 
Hampshire  raised  the  question  as  to  whether  the  Senate 
would  grant  leave  to  introduce  it ;  and  I  think  the 
proper  question  to  he  put  now  is.  Will  the  Senate  grant 
leave  to  introduce  a  bill  repealing  the  Fugitive  Slave 
Law  ?  The  elfect  of  the  motion  of  the  Senator  from 
Louisiana  would  be  to  lay  the  subject  on  the  table,  from 
which  it  might  be  taken  at  any  time  for  action.  For 
one,  I  desire  to  give  a  decisive  vote  now,  declaring 
that  I  am  nnwilling  to  legislate  upon  the  subject,  that 
I  am  satisfied  with  the  law  as  it  reads,  and  that  I  will 
not  aid  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  or  any  Senator, 
in  — — ■ 

TnE  Peesidixg  Officer.  The  Senator  from  Indiana 
is  certainly  not  in  order. 

Mr.  Bright.  I  certainly  am  in  order  in  calling  the 
attention  of  the  Chair  to  the  fact  that  the  Senator  from 
New  Hampshire 

The  Presiding  Officer.  The  Senator  from  Indiana 
is  not  in  order. 

Mr.  Bright.  Then  I  will  sit  down  and  ask  the  Chair 
to  state  wherein  I  am  out  of  order. 

The  Presiding  Officer,  In  discussing  a  question 
which  is  not  before  the  Senate. 

Mr.  Bright.  I  claim  that  the  motion  is  before  the 
Senate.  The  Senator  from  New  Hampshire  raised  the 
question  immediately;  that- — - 

The  Presiding  Officer.  The  Chair  decides  otherwisa 

Mr.  Bright.  Then  I  appeal  from  the  decision  of  the 
Chair,  and  I  state  this  as  my  point  of  order:  that,  before 
the  biU  was  presented  in  l^al  parlance,  the  Senator 
from  New  Hampshire  raised  tlie  question  as  to  whether 


■cibyGoogIc 


444  STRUGGLE  FOR  REPEAL  OF 

the  Senate  would  grant  leave,  and  that  is  the  point  now 
before  the  Senate. 

The  Presiding  Officer.  The  Chair  will  state  the 
question  wliich  he  supposes  to  be  pending  The  Sena- 
tor from  Califomia  made  a  point  of  ordei,  that  debate  on 
the  bUl  proposed  to  be  introduced  by  the  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  was  not  in  order.  The  Chan  so  ruled. 
From  that  ruling  the  Senator  from  Mabsachusetts  took 
an  appeal  The  Chair  supposed  that  the  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  had  yielded  the  floor,  and  he  gave  the 
iloor  to  the  Senator  from  Louisiana,  who  moved  to  lay 
that  appeal  on  the  table.  That  is  the  question  which  is 
now  pending.  The  Chair  before  si^gested,  that,  if  the 
Senator  from  Massachusetts  had  not  yielded  the  floor, 
he  had  made  a  mistake  in  giving  the  floor  to  the  Senator 
from  Louisiana,  but  he  did  not  suppose  that  the  Sena- 
tor from  Massachusetts,  after  taking  the  appeal,  without 
some  indication  of  his  intention  to  debate  it,  could  con- 
tinue to  hold  the  iloor,  and  he  therefore  recognized  the 
Senator  from  Louisiana.  The  Chair  is  sorry,  if  he  did 
the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  injustice  in  that  respect; 
but  he  did  not  hear  him,  and  recc^nized  the  Senator 
from  Louisiana. 

Mr.  Bright.  I  would  respectfully  ask  the  Chair 
what  has  become  of  the  motion  submitted  by  the  Sena- 
tor from  New  Hampshire  ? 

The  Presidisg  Officer.  The  Chair  did  not  under- 
stand him  to  submit  a  motion,  but  the  Senator  from 
California  took  his  point  of  order. 

Mr,  Bright.  I  wish  to  inquire  of  the  Senator  from 
New  Hampshire  whether  he  has  withdrawn  his  mo- 
tion? 

The  Peesiding  Officer.    It  was  not  entertained.    It 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  445 

is  not  in  Ms  power  to  say  whether  it  was  withdrawn  or 
not,  for  it  was  not  entertained. 

Me.  Norris.  I  think  I  can  inform  my  friend  from 
Indiana  how  the  matter  stands.  The  Senator  from 
Massachusetts  proposed  to  introduce  a  hill  on  notice 
given.  I  raised  the  question,  that  it  could  not  be  intro- 
duced without  leave  of  the  Senate,  if  there  was  objec- 
tion. 

Mr.  Sumker.  Do  I  understand  the  Senator  to  say 
without  notice  given  ?  I  asked  leave  to  introduce  the 
bill  in  pursuance  of  notice. 

Mb,  Norris.  The  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  I 
have  already  stated,  offered  his  bill  agreeably  to  pre- 
vious notice. 

Mr.  Sumner.     Precisely. 

Mb.  Noreis.  The  question  was  then  raised,  whether 
it  could  be  received,  if  there  was  objection  ?  The  ques- 
tion arose,  whether  leave  should  be  granted  to  the  Sena- 
tor from  Massachusetts  to  introduce  the  bill  ? 

Mb.  Sumner.    Tliat  is  the  first  question. 

Mr.  Norris.  The  Senator  from  Massachusetts,  upon 
the  question  of  granting  leave,  undertook  to  address  the 
Senate.  He  was  then  called  to  order  by  my  friend  from 
California  for  discussing  that  question.  The  Chair  sus- 
tained the  objection  of  the  Senator  from  California. 
From  the  decision  of  the  Chair  the  Senator  from  Mas- 
sachusetts took  an  appeal ;  and  that  is  where  the  ques- 
tion now  stands,  unless  the  Senator  from  Louisiana  had 
a  right  to  make  the  motion  which  he  did  make,  which 
was  to  lay  the  appeal  on  the  table. 

The  Presidikg  Officee.  The  question  is,  unless  the 
Senator  from  Louisiana  will  disembarrass  the  Chair  by 
withdrawing  it,  on  the  motion  of  the  Senator  from  Lou- 
isiana to  lay  the  appeal  on  the  table. 


■cibyGoogIc 


446  STRUGGLE    FOE   KEPEAL   OF 

Mr.  Sumneb.  On  that  motion  I  ask  for  the  yeas  aud 
nays. 

The  yeaa  and  nays  were  ordered. 

Mr.  Foot  (of  Vermont).  On  what  motion  have  the 
yeas  and  nays  been  ordered  ? 

The  Presiding  Officer.  On  the  motion  of  the  Sen- 
ator from  Louisiana. 

Mr.  Walked  I  wish  to  know,  before  voting,  what 
will  be  the  effect  of  a  vote  given  in  the  affirmative  on 
thia  motion  ?  Will  it  carry  the  bill  and  the  whole  sub- 
ject on  the  table  ? 

Mb.  Foot.  An  affirmative  vote  carries  the  whole 
measure  on  the  table. 

The  Presiding  Officek,  Yes,  Sir ;  if  the  motion  to 
lay  on  the  table  be  agreed  to,  it  carries  the  bill  with  it. 

Several  Senators.    No,  no  1 

Mr.  Benjamin.  The  question  is,  whether,  on  the 
motion  for  leave  to  introduce  the  biU,  there  shall  be 
debate  ?  Tlie  Chair  has  decided  that  there  shall  be  no 
debate.  Those  who  vote  "yea"  on  my  motion  to  lay 
the  appeal  of  the  Senator  from  Massachusetts  on  the 
table  wiE  vote  that  there  is  to  be  no  debate  upon  tlie 
permission  to  oifer  the  bill,  and  tlien  tlie  question  will 
be  taken  upon  granting  leave. 

Mr.  Walker.  Tlie  Chair  decides  differently.  The 
Chair  decides,  if  I  understand,  that  it  will  carry  the 
biE  on  the  table.  Then  how  can  we  ever  reach  the 
question  of  leave,  when  objection  is  made  ? 

Mr.  Weller.  I  object  to  this  discussion.  The  Chair 
will  decide  that  question  when  it  arises.  It  does  not 
arise  now.  I  insist  that  the  Secretary  shall  go  on  and 
call  the  roll 

Mr,  AValker.     Suppose  some  of  us  object  to  it  I 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  FOaiTIVE  SLAVE  ACT,  447 

■   Mr.  Weller.     Then  I  object  to  your  discussing  it. 

The  Peesidisg  Officbe.  The  Chair,  on  reHection, 
thinks  that  the  motion,  if  agreed  to,  would  not  have  a 
further  effect  than  to  bring  up  the  question  of  granting 
leave. 

Me.  Bright.  I  desire  to  understand  the  Chair,  I 
do  not  wish  to  insist  on  anything  that  is  not  right,  or 
that  is  not  within  the  rules.  That  I  insist  upon  having. 
The  honoiaMe  Senator  from  Louisiana  is  right  in  his 
conclusior^  aa  to  his  motion,  provided  lie  had  a  right  to 
niake  the  motion ;  hut  I  doubt  whether  he  had  a  right 
to  make  that  motion  while  the  motion  of  the  honorable 
Senator  from  New  Hampshire  was  pendii^.  I  do  not 
wish,  however,  to  consume  the  time  of  the  Senate.  If 
the  effect  of  the  decision  of  the  Chair  is  to  brii^  us 
back  to  the  question  as  to  whether  we  ahalL  receive  the 
bill  or  not,  I  will  yield  the  floor. 

The  PREsroiNG  Officer.    That  is  it. 

Mk.  Bright.     Very  well 

Mh.  Sumner.  Before  the  vote  ia  taken,  allow  me  to 
read  a  few  words  from  the  Kulea  and  Orders,  and  from 
Jefferson's  Manual 

"  One  day's  notice,  at  least,  shall  be  given  of  an  intended 
motion  for  leave  to  bring  in  a  bill." 

That  is  the  25th  rule  of  the  Senate ;  and  then  to  that 
rule,  in  the  pubhcation  which  I  now  hold  in  my  hand, 
is  appended,  from  Jefferson's  Manual,  the  following  de- 
cisive language : — 

"  When  a  member  desires  to  bring  in  a  bill  on  any  sub- 
ject, ke  statee  to  the  House,  in  general  terms,  the  causes  for  do- 
ing it,  and  concludes  by  moving  for  leave  to  bring  in  a  bill 
entitled,  &o.  Leaye  being  given,  on  the  question,  a  committee 
is  appointed  to  prepare  and  bring  in  the  bill" 


■cibyGoogIc 


448  STEUGGLE   FOE  EEPEAL  OF 

Kow  I  would  simply  observe,  fcliat  my  purpose  was 
merely  to  make  a  statement 

Me.  Benjamin.     I  call  to  order. 

The  Peesiding  Officer.  The  Senator  had  presented 
his  bill,  and  was  debating  it  afterwards.  The  cLuestion 
is  on  the  motion  of  the  Senator  from  Louisiana  to  lay 
the  appeal  on  the  table,  and  on  that  the  yeas  and  nays 
have  been  ordered. 

The  question,  beingtatenliy  yeas  and  nays,  resulted,  ■ — yeas  35,  nays 
10,  as  follows :  — 

Yeas,  —  Messrs.  Adonis,  Atchison,  Bell,  Benjaniin,  Brodhead, 
Brown,  Butler,  Case,  Clay,  Cooper,  Dawson,  Dodge,  of  Iowa,  Evans, 
Fitzpatrick,  Geyer,  Gwiu,  Johnson, ,  Jones,  of  Iowa,  Jones,  of  Ttn- 
nesaee,  MaUory,  Mason,  Morton,  Honie,  Pearce,  Pettit,  Pratt,  Rusk, 
Sebastian,  ShdeU,  Stuart,  Thompson,  of  Kentucky,  Thomson,  of  !New 
Jersey,  Toombs,  Toucey,  and  "Weller,  —  35. 

Mays,  —  Messrs.  Chose,  Fesaenden,  Fish,  Foot,  Gillette,  Eockwell, 
Stjwai-d,  Sumner,  Wade,  and  Walker,  —  10. 

So  the  appeal  was  ordered  to  lie  on  the  table. 

The  PnESiniNG  Officee.  The  question  now  is  on 
granting  leave  to  introduce  the  biU. 

Mr.  SuMNEE.  On  that  question  I  ask  for  the  yeas 
and  nays. 

Mr.  Stuart.  I  rise  to  a  question  of  order ;  and  I 
think,  if  the  Chair  will  consider  it  for  the  moment,  he 
win,  or  at  least  I  hope  he  will,  agree  with  me.  The 
parliamentary  law  is  the  law  under  which  the  Senate 
act.  "Whenever  there  is  a  motion  made  to  lay  on  the 
table  a  subject  connected  with  the  main  subject,  and  it 
prevails,  it  carries  the  whole  question  with  it.  It  is  dif- 
ferent entirely  from  the  rules  in  the  House  of  Represen- 
tatives. The  rules  in  the  House  vary  the  parliamentary 
law,  and  you  may  there  move  to  lay  a  matter  on  the 
table,  because  that  is  the  final  vote,  and  ia  equivalent  to 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  449 

lejecting  it,  and  a  motion  to  take  it  up  from  the  taMe 
is  not  in  order.  But  now  the  Presiding  Officer  will  see, 
that,  if  this  course  be  pursued,  the  Senate  may  grant 
leave  to  introduce  this  bill,  they  may  go  on  and  pass  it, 
and  yet  naxt  week  it  will  be  in  order  for  the  Senator 
from  Massachusetts  to  move  to  take  up  the  appeal 
which  the  Senate  has  just  laid  on  the  table ;  whereas 
the  whole  subject  on  which  his  appeal  rested  might  have 
been  passed  and  sent  to  the  other  House.  That  surely 
cannot  be  so.  The  ruling  of  the  Chair  in  this  respect, 
therefore,  I  suggest  is  wrong,  and  the  motion  to  lay  on 
the  table  carries  the  whole  subject  with  it.  It  is  impor- 
tant to  have  the  matter  settled  for  the  future  practice  of 
the  Senate. 

The  Peesiding  Ofhcer.  At  the  fiiBt  mooting  of  the 
proposition,  the  Chair  was  of  that  opinion ;  but  he  is 
perfectly  satisfied  now  that  it  did  not  carry  the  whole 
question  with  it.  The  question  was  on  the  motion  to 
lay  the  appeal  on  the  table,  and  that  motion  was  ex- 
hausted when  it  did  lay  the  appeal  on  the  tabla  It  did 
not  reach  back  to  affect  the  question  of  granting  leave. 
That  is  now  the  question  before  the  Senate.  On  that 
the  yeas  and  nays  have  been  asked  for  by  the  Senator 
from  Massachusetts. 
The  yeaa  and  nays  were  ordered. 

Me.  Stuart.  I  wiU  not  take  an  appeal  from  the  de- 
cision of  the  Chair,  but  I  only  wish  to  say,  that,  as  I  am 
satisfied  I  am  right,  I  do  not  wish,  by  acquiescing  in  the 
decision  of  the  Chair,  to  embarrass  ua  when  such  occa- 
sions may  arise  again. 

The  question,  'beiiig  taken  by  yeaa  and  nays  upon  granting  leave  to 
introduce  the  bill,  resulted,  — yeas  10,  nays  35,  as  follows  :  — 


;db,Googlc 


450    STRUGGLE   FOR  REPEAL   OF  FUGITIVE   SLA.VE  ACT. 

Yeas,  —  Mesfira.  Chase,  Dodge,  of  "Wisflonsin,  Fc&sendsn,  Foot,  GE- 
lette,  Koekwell,  Seward,  Snmner,  Wade,  and  Wiilker,  —  10. 

Nays,  —  Mesers.  Adams,  Atehison,  Bell,  Bei^amin,  Brlglit,  Btod- 
head,  Brown,  Butler,  Caas,  Clay,  Cooper,  Dawson,  Evaiie,  Fitzpatriek, 
Geyer,  Gwin,  Johnson,  Jones,  of  iowa,  Jones,  of  Tennessee,  Mallory, 
Mason,  Morton,  Noiris,  Pearoe,  Pettit,  Pratt,  Rusk,  Sebastian,  Slidell, 
Stuart,  Thompson,  of  Kentucky,  Thomson,  of  New  Jeiisey,  Toombs, 
Touoey,  ajid  WeUer,  —  35. 

So  the  Senate  refused  to  grant  leave  to  introduce  the  bill. 


;db,Googlc 


DUTIES  OF  MASSACHUSETTS  AT  THE  PRESENT  CRISIS. 
PORMATION  OF  THE  REPUBLICAN  PARTY. 


The  IVee-Soil  party,  haying  assumed  tlie  name  of  Eepubliean  party, 
held  it£  Annual  Gocyention  at  Worcester,  September  7,  1854.  It  waa 
organized  by  the  foEowiiig  officers  :  Hon.  Robert  Eantoul,  of  Beverly, 
the  venerable  father  of  the  late  Mr.  Kaiitoul,  as  President ;  George  E. 
Ensaell,  of  West  Koxbury,  B.  W,  Gage,  of  Chatlestown,  Samuel  Hop- 
kins, of  Northampton,  Charles  Shute,  of  Hingham,  Albert  Cuirier,  of 
Kewburyport,  Warren  Lovering,  of  Medway,  Adam  Harrington,  of 
Shrewsbury,  Francis  Watkins,  of  Hinsdale,  Robert  Stnrtevant,  of  Savoy, 
Asaph  Churehill,  of  Dorchester,  Richard  P.  Waters,  of  Beverly,  Wil- 
liam Washburn,  of  Boston,  Charles  Beok,  of  Cambridge,  Benjamin  B. 
Sissou,  of  Westport,  Joel  Shed,  of  Bridgewafer,  Augustus  Morse,  of  Leo- 
minster, Foster  Hooper,  of  Fall  River,  Levi  Reed,  of  Abington,  John 
A.  Andrew,  of  Hingham,  Vice-Presidents ;  Joseph  Denny,  of  Worces- 
ter, William  H.  Harris,  of  Worcesf«r,  E.  W.  Stacy,  of  Milford,  Charles 
R.  Ladd,  of  Cliicopee,  William  H.  DeCosta,  of  Charlestown,  Secretaries. 
At  the  same  Convention  Hon.  Henry  Wilson  was  nominated  for  Gov- 
ernor, and  Hon.  Increase  Sumner  for  Lieutenant-Governor.  John  A. 
Andi'ew,  Esq. ,  was  made  Chairman  of  the  State  Committee. 

Mr.  Smnnei's  reception  in  the  Convention  was  q^uickened  by  recent 
events  in  which  he  had  borne  part.  It  is  thus  described  in  a  report  of 
the  Convention. 

"At  this  point  the  Hon.  Charles  Sumner  entered  the  hall.  His  re- 
ception was  such  as  is  rarely  accorded  to  a  pnblic  man.  The  whole  vast 
auilience  rose  as  one.  man  to  welcome  him,  and  the  most  deafening  cheers 
of  welcome  resounded  for  several  ininntes.  We  hare  never  seen  a  more 
hearty  and  enthnsiaatic  demonstration  in  honor  of  any  man.  It  was  the 
spontaneons  homage  of  true  men  to  the  man  who  had  upheld  the  Freedom 
standard  and 
upheld  the  hi 


;db,Googlc 


452  DUTIES  OF  MASSACHUSETTS 

and  thi-Dwn  buck  upon  bee  Hssailants  the  hiunCs  luid  inEults  vi'hich  they  had 
never  ceased  to  heap  npon  her.  The  cheering,  as  our  Senatoi'  ujipetired 
upon  ths  plHtform  and  Cook  his  sent,  was  loud  and  long  continued." 

M.T.  Sumner  was  at  once  called  to  speak.  Hia  speech  is  given  as  re- 
ported by  the  Boston  Traveller,  which  ran  a  special  train  in  one  hour 
from  Worcester,  a  distance  of  forty  miles,  in  oi-der  to  lay  it  before  the 
public  witliout  delay. 

In  tills  speech  Mr.  Sumner  had  two  objects,  — first,  to  vindicate  the 
necessity  of  the  Republican  party,  and,  secondly,  t«  destroy  the  operas 
tion  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  in  Maasaelmfietts,  showing  especially 
that  citizens  ate  not  constrained  to  its  support.  His  poaation  with  re- 
gard to  the  oath  to  support  the  Constitution  was  much  discussed  at 
the  time,  and  the  National  Inteltigemxr,  in  elaborate  articles  by  Mr. 
Gales,  undertook  to  call  him  to  account.  To  the  latter  he  replied  by 
letter.     The  speech  hod  on  extensive  circulation. 

Mr.  Sumner  came  to  the  Convention  at  the  invitation  of  Mr.  Andrew, 
Cliairman  of  the  Provisional  State  Committee,  whose  first  letter,  dated 
July  22,  1854,  was  as  follows. 

"Yon  will  have  seen,  before  receiving  this  note,  the  report  of  the  meethig 
at  Worcester,  at  which  a  nevipai'ty  loae  begim,  and  the  steps  preliminary  to 
a  Stats  nominating  convention  taken.  I  think,  in  spite  of  strong  opposition 
■  from  the  Whig  presses  and  fuglemen,  who  cannot  bear  to  give  up  their  &o- 
tltious  powers  and  influence,  that  there  is  a  great  popular  movement  com- 
menced, which  may,  under  proper  cultivation,  disclose  a  splendid  result  in 
the  Tail.  But  more  depends  upon  the  aid  you  can  give  than  upon  that  of 
any  one  man.  Your  recent  battles  In  the  Senate  have  shut  the  mouth  of 
persona!  opposition,  wmng  applause  from  the  unwilling,  excited  a  State's 
pride  and  gratitnde,  such  as  rarely  it  is  the  fortune  of  any  one  to  win.  Tour 
preseaco  at  the  nominating  convention,  to  be  bald  on  the  lOth  of  August,  — 
probably  at  Springfield,  —  is  a  point  which  must  be  agreed  to  at  once.  It 
will  secure  a  most  triumphant  meeting,  certidnly  in  point  of  numbers  and 
enthusiasm.  I  want  you  to  write  to  me  at  once,  permitting  me  to  say  to 
liny  of  our  friends  that  you  vnll  attend  the  meeting.  A  speech  of  half  an 
hour,  or  an  honri  is  oil  that  yon  need  make,  though  you  could  have  three 
liours,  if  you  would  use  theni.  ....  I  am  bold,  speak  urgently,  since  I  nm, 
as  Clwiinnan  of  the  Provisional  Stale  Committee,  officially  respoiiBible  for 
rve  the  cause  in  tills  behalf." 


This  was  followed  by  another  letter  from  Mr.  Andrew,  dated  August 
28,  1854,  as  follows. 

"  I,  however,  wish  to  have  the  authority  now  to  say  definitely  to  hH  in- 
quirers that  you  will  be  present  on  the  Tth,  and  address  the  convention,  and 
I  wish  this  to  be  considered  as  a  formal  and  official  invitation.  Thero  are 
constant  references  made  to  the  hope  of  seeing  and  hearing  yon  there,  on  all 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT  THE  PRESENT  CEISIS.  453 

/iHiids.  Everyboilj  counts  for  that  gratiflontion.  And  we  onii  do  nothing 
which  will  so  eompletely  seoui'e  a  triumplmjit  gatUeriiig  as  to  anuoiiuce 
rour  liame.  The  whole  Free-Soil  party,  proud  of  yonr  recent  acliievemants, 
and  jsratefiil  for  the  many  exhibitions  of  yonr  devotediiess  to  ont  principles 
at  all  times  of  hazard  and  necessity,  and  the  people  of  all  partiee,  who  feet 
yon  to  hare  been  the  moat  conspicuously  representative  man  to  whom  Mas- 
sachusetts has  intrusted  her  interest  in  Congress  since  the  death  of  John 
Quinoy  Adams,  are  alike  anitioas  to  greet  you. 

"  I  do  not  wisli  you  to  feel  under  the  necessity  of  preparing  for  one  of 
yonr  greatest  speeches.  No  one  will  demand  that  of  you.  They  only  want 
yon  to  come,  and  to  say  what  seeraa  to  yourself  proper  to  say  at  the  time." 

The  speech  drew  from  Mr.  Chase  the  following  expression, 

"  Your  speech  was  just  the  thing.  I  rend  it  with  delighted  ndtniration. 
Only  one  thing  abated  my  pleasure, —  the  dissolution  of  the  Independent 
Democracy.  I  am  now  without  a  party:  but  no  matter;  I  sliall  soon  cease 
to  have  any  connection  with  politios.'' 

Mr.  Seward  wrote  thus :  — 

"I  have  read  yont  noble  speech.  It  is  eminently  able,  and  in  a  tone  that 
is  as  oharaoteristio  as  it  is  worthy  of  you.  Of  its  particular  direction,  as  re- 
lates to  parties,  it  is  not  becoming  me  to  speak.  Its  merits  as  an  argument 
are  unsurpassed." 

Me.  President,  and  Fellow-Citizens  of  Massachu- 
setts:— 

AFTER  months  of  constant,  anxious  service  in  an- 
other place,  away  from  Maasacliusetts,  I  am  per- 
mitted to  stajid  among  you  again,  my  fellow-eitizens, 
and  to  draw  satisfaction  and  strengtli  from  your  gener- 
ous presence.  [Applaiise.]  Life  is  fuli  of  change  and 
contrast.  From  slave  soil  I  have  come  to  free  soil. 
[Applause.]  From  the  tainted  breath  of  Slavery  I  have 
passed  into  this  "bracing  air  of  Freedom.  [Applatise.] 
And  the  heated  antt^onism  of  debate,  shooting  forth  its 
fiery  cinders,  is  changed  into  this  brimming,  overflowing 
■welcome,  while  I  seem  to  lean  on  the  great  heart  of  our 
beloved  Commonwealth,  as  it  palpitates  audibly  in  this 
crowded  assembly.     [Zoud  and  long  applause.] 


■cibyGoogIc 


454  DUTIES   OF  MASSACHUSETTS 

Let  me  say  at  once,  frankly  and  sincerely,  that  I  am 
not  here  to  receive  applause  or  to  give  occasion  for  to- 
kens of  public  regard,  but  simply  to  unite  with  fellow- 
citizens  in  new  vows  of  duty.  [Applause.]  And  yet  I 
would  not  be  thought  uisensible  to  the  good-will  now 
swelling  from  so  many  honest  bosoms.  It  touches  me 
more  than  I  can  tell. 

During  the  late  session  of  Coi^ress,  an  eminent  sup- 
porter of  the  Nebraska  Bill  said  to  rae,  with  great  ani- 
mation, in  lai^age  which  I  give  with  some  precision, 
that  you  may  appreciate  the  style  as  well  as  the  senti- 
ment, ,"  I  would  not  go  through  all  that  you  do  wt  tkis 
vdgger  question  for  all  the  offices  and  honors  of  the 
country,"  To  which  I  naturally  and  promptly  replied, 
"  Nor  woidd  I,  —  for  all  the  offices  and  honors  of  the 
country."  [Laughier  and  long  applause^  Not  in  such 
things  are  the  inducements  to  this  warfare.  For  myself, 
if  I  have  been  able  to  do  aught  in  any  respect  not  un- 
worthy of  you,  it  is  because  I  thought  rather  of  those 
commandii^  duties  which  are  above  office  and  honor. 
[CWes  of  "  Good  !  good ! "  and  loud  applaiise.] 

And  now,  on  the  eve  of  an  important  election  in  this 
State,  we  are  assembled  to  take  counsel  how  best  to  per- 
form those  duties  which  we  owe  to  our  common  coun- 
try. We  are  to  choose  eleven  Representatives  in  Con- 
gress,—  also.  Governor,  Lieutenant-Governor,  and  mem- 
bers of  the  Legislature,  which  last  will  choose  a  Senator 
of  the  United  States,  to  uphold,  for  five  years  ensning, 
tlie  principles  and  honor  of  Massachusetts.  If  in  these 
elections  you  were  governed  by  partialities  or  prejudi- 
ces, personal  or  political,  or  merely  by  the  exactions  of 
party,  I  should  have  nothing  to  say  now,  except  to  dis- 
miss you  to  the  ignoble  work.    ["That  is  it!"  "Good! 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT  THE  PRESENT  CRISIS.  455 

good  /"]  But  I  assume  that  you  are  ready  to  renounce 
these  influences,  and  press  forward  with  single  regard 
to  the  duties  now  incumbent 

Here  two  questions  occur,  absorbing  all  others  :  first, 
■what  are  our  political  duties  here  lq  Massachusetts  at 
the  present  time  ?  and,  secondly,  how,  and  by  what 
agency,  shall  they  be  performed  ?  What  and  how  ? 
These  are  the  two  questions,  of  which  I  shall  briefly 
speak  in  their  order,  attempting  no  elaborate  discus- 
sion, but  aiming  to  state  the  case  so  that  it  wiU  be  in- 
telligible to  all  who  hear  me. 

And  first,  what  are  our  present  duties  here  in  Mas- 
sachusetts ?  Unfolding  these,  I  need  not  dwell  on  the 
wrong  and  shame  of  Slavery,  or  on  the  character  of  the 
Slave  Power  —  that  OKgarcby  of  Slaveholders  —  now 
ruling  the  Eepublic.  These  you  understand.  And  yet 
there  are  two  outrages,  fresh  in  recollection,  which  I  must 
not  fail  to  expose,  as  natural  manifestations  of  Slavery 
and  the  Slave  Power,  One  is  the  repeal  of  the  Prohibi- 
tion of  Slavery  in  the  vast  Missouri  Territory,  now  known 
as  Kansas  and  Nebraska,  contrary  to  time-honored  com- 
pact and  plighted  faith.  The  other  is  the  seizure  of 
Anthony  Burns  on  the  free  soil  of  Massachusetts,  and 
his  surrender,  without  judge  or  jury,  to  a  Slave-Hunter 
from  Virginia,  to  be  thrust  back  into  perpetual  bond- 
age. ["  Skatne  !  shaine ! "]  These  outrages  cry  aloud  to 
Heaven,  and  to  you,  people  of  Massachusetts !  \Sensatwnl\ 
Tlieir  intrinsic  wickedness  is  enhanced  by  the  way*  in 
which  they  were  accomplished.  Of  the  first  I  know 
something  from  personal  observation;  of  the  latter  I 
am  informed  only  by  public  report. 


■cibyGoogIc 


456  DUTIES    OP  MASSACHUSETTS 

It  is  characteristic  of  tlie  Slave  Power  not  to  stick 
at  tlie  means  siipposed  needful  in  carrying  forward  its 
plans ;  but  never,  on  any  occasion,  were  its  assumptions 
so  barefaced  and  tyrannical  as  in  the  passage  of  the 
Nebraslia  BilL 

This  bill  was  precipitated  upon  Congress  without 
one  word  of  public  recommendation  from  the  Presi- 
dent, without  notice  or  discussion  in  any  newspaper, 
and  without  a  single  petition  from  the  people.  It 
was  uiged  by  different  advocates,  on  two  principal 
ai^iments,  so  opposite  and  inconsistent  as  to  slap 
each  other  in  tlio  fa«e  [laughter]  :  one,  that,  by  the 
repeal  of  the  Prohibition,  the  territory  would  be  abso- 
lutely open  to  the  entry  of  slaveholders  with  their 
slaves ;  and  the  other,  that  the  people  there  would  be 
left  to  determine  whether  slavehoiders  should  enter 
with  their  slaves.  "With  some,  the  apology  was  the 
alleged  rights  of  slaveholders ;  with  others,  the  alleged 
rights  of  the  people.  With  some,  it  was  openly  the 
extension  of  Slavery ;  and  with  others,  openly  the  es- 
tablishment of  Freedom,  under  the  pretence  of  "popular 
sovereignty."  The  measure  tluis  upheld  in  deiiance  of 
reason  was  carried  through  Congress  in  defiance  of  all 
the  securities  of  legislation. 

It  was  carried,  Jirst,  by  whipping  in;  tlirough  Executive 
influence  and  patronage,  men  who  acted  against  their 
own  declared  judgment  and  the  known  will  of  their 
constituents ;  secondly,  by  thrusting  out  of  place,  both 
in  the  Senate  and  House  of  Representatives,  important 
business,  long  pending,  and  usurpmg  its  room ;  thirdly, 
by  trampling  underfoot  the  rules  of  the  House  of  Rep- 
resentatives, always  before  the  safet.uaid  of  the  minor- 
ity; and,  fourthly,  ,by  driving  it  to  a  dise  during  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT   THE  PRESENT   CRISIS.  457 

present  Congress,  so  that  it  might  not  be  arrested  by 
the  indignant  voice  of  the  people.  Such  were  some  of 
the  means  hy  which  the  Nehmslia  Bill  was  earned.  If 
the  clear  will  of  the  people  had  not  been  defied,  it  could 
not  have  passed.  If  the  Government  had  not  nefari- 
ously interposed,  it  could  not  have  passed-  If  it  had 
been  left  to  its  natural  place  in  the  order  of  business, 
it  could  uot  have  passed.  If  the  rules  of  the  House 
and  the  rights  of  the  minority  had  not  been  violated,  ifc 
could  not  have  passed.  If  it  had  been  allowed  to  go 
over  to  another  Congress,  when  the  people  might  be 
heard,  it  would  have  failed,  forever  failed. 

Contemporaneously  with  the  iinal  triumph  of  this 
outrage  at  Washington,  another  dismal  tragedy  was  en- 
acted at  Boston.  In  those  streets  where  he  had  walked 
as  freeman  Anthony  Bums  was  seized  as  slave,  under 
the  base  pretext  that  he  was  a  criminal,  —  imprisoned 
in  the  Court-House,  which  was  turned  for  the  time  in- 
to fortress  and  barracoon,  —  guarded  by  heartless  hire- 
lings, whose  chief  idea  of  Liberty  was  license  to  wrong 
[loud  applause,  and  cries  of  " Tltat's  it!  that's  it ■'"], — 
escorted  by  intrusive  soldiers  of  the  United  States,  — 
watched  by  a  prostituted  militia,  —  and  finally  given 
up  to  a  Slave-Hunter  by  the  decree  of  a  petty  magis- 
trate, who  did  not  hesitate  to  take  upon  his  soul  tlie 
awful  responsibility  of  dooming  a  fellow-man,  in  whom 
he  could  find  no  fault,  to  a  fate  worse  than  death. 
How  all  this  was  accomplished  I  need  not  relate.  Suf- 
fice it  to  say,  that,  in  doing  this  deed  of  woe  and  shame, 
the  liberties  of  all  our  citizens,  white  as  well  as  black, 
were  put  in  jeopardy,  the  Mayor  of  Boston  was  con- 
verted to  a  tool  [a^lause],  the  Governor  of  the  Com- 
monwealth to  a  cipher  [lon^  continued  o.pplause\,  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


458  DUTIES    OF    MASSACHUSETTS 

laws,  the  precious  sentiments,  the  religion,  the  pride 
and  glory  of  Massachusetts  were  trampled  in  the  dust, 
and  you  and  I  and  all  of  us  fell  down  while  the  Slave 
Power  flourished  over  ua.  ["Siiame  !  shame !  "  and  ap- 
plattse.] 

These  things  in  themselves  are  bad,  very  had ;  but 
they  are  worse,  when  regarded  as  natural  offspring  of 
the  Ohgarchy  now  swaying  the  country.  And  it  is  this 
Oligarchy  which,  at  every  political  hazard,  we  must 
oppose,  until  it  is  overthrown.  Lord  Chatham  once  ex- 
claimed, that  the  time  had  been,  when  he  was  content  to 
bring  France  to  her  knees ;  now  he  would  not  stop  till 
he  had  laid  her  on  her  back.  Nor  can  we  be  content 
with  leas  in  our  warfare.  We  must  not  stop  till  we 
have  laid  the  Slave  Power  on  its  back.  [Prolonged 
ckeers,'\  And,  fellow-citizens,  permit  me  to  say,  not  till 
then  will  tlie  Free  States  be  absolved  from  all  political 
responsibility  for  Slavery,  and  relieved  from  that  corrupt 
spirit  of  compromise  which  now  debases  at  once  their 
politics  and  their  religion ;  nor  till  then  will  there  he 
repose  for  the  country,  [Immense  chem'ing^  Indem- 
nity for  the  past  and  security  for  the  future  must  be 
our  watchwords.  [Applause^  But  these  can  be  ob- 
tained only  when  Slavery  is  dispossessed  of  present 
vantage-ground,  by  driving  it  back  exclusively  within 
the  limits  of  the  States,  and  putting  the  National  Gov- 
ernment, everywhere  within  its  constitutional  sphere, 
openly,  actively,  and  perpetually  on  the  side  of  Freedom. 
The  conseq^uences  of  this  change  of  policy  would  be 
of  far-reaching  and  incalculable  beneficence.  Not  only 
would  Freedom  become  national  and  Slavery  section- 
al, as  was  intended  by  our  fathers,  but  the  National 
Government  would  become  the  mighty  instrument  and 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT  THE  PEESENT   CEISIS.  459 

Iierald  of  Freedom,  as  it  ia  now  the  mighty  inatra- 
ment  and  herald  of  Slavery.  Its  powers,  its  treasury, 
its  patronage,  would  all  be  turned,  in  harmony  with 
the  Constitution,  to  promote  Freedom.  The  Commit- 
tees of  Congress,  where  Slavery  now  rules,  —  Congress 
itself,  and  the  Cabinet  also,  —  would  all  be  organized' 
for  Freedom.  The  hypocritical  disguise  or  renunciation 
of  Antislavery  sentiment  would  ceMe  to  be  necessary 
for  the  sake  of  political  preferment ;  and  the  Slavehold- 
ing  Oligarchy,  banished  from  the  National  Government, 
and  despoiled  of  ill-gotten  political  consequence,  with- 
out ability  to  punish  or  reward,  would  cease  to  be  feai'ed, 
either  at  the  North  or  the  South,  until  at  last  the  citi- 
zens of  the  Slave  States,  where  a  large  portion  have  no 
interest  in  Slavery,  would  demand  Emancipation,  and 
the  great  work  would  commence.  Such  is  the  obvious 
course  of  things.  To  the  overthrow  of  the  Slave  Power 
we  are  summoned  by  a  double  call,  one  political  and  the 
other  philanthropic,  —  first,  to  remove  an  oppressive 
tyranny  from  the  National  Government,  and,  secondly, 
to  open  the  gates  of  Emancipation  in  the  Slave  States. 
\£oud  applause.] 

While  keeping  this  great  piupose  in  view,  we  must 
not  forget  details.  The  existence  of  Slavery  anywhere 
within  the  national  jurisdiction,  in  the  Territories,  in 
the  District  of  Columbia,  or  on  the  high  seas  beneath 
the  national  flag,  is  an  unconstitutional  usurpation, 
which  must  be  opposed.  The  Fugitive  Slave  Bill,  mon- 
strous in  cruelty,  as  in  unconstitutionality,  is  a  usurpa- 
tion, which  must  be  opposed.  The  admission  of  new 
Slave  States,  from  whatsoever  quarter,  from  Texas  or 
Cuba  [applame],  Utah  or  New  Mexico,  must  be  op- 
posed.    And  to  every   scheme  of  Slavery,  whether  in 


■cibyGoogIc 


460  DUTIES   OP  MASSACHUSETTS 

Cuba  or  Mexico,  on  the  li'g'i  seas  in  opening  tlie  slavs- 
trade,  in  the  West  Indies,  or  in  the  Valley  of  the  Ama- 
zon, whether  accomphshed  or  merely  plotted,  whether 
pending  or  in  prospect,  we  must  send  forth  an  evee- 
lASTiNG  NO !  [Lonff  continued  aj>plame.]  Such  is  the 
present,  immediate  duty  of  Massachusetts,  without  com- 
promise or  hesitation. 

Thus  far  I  have  spoken  of  duties  in  national  matters ; 
hut  there  are  other  duties  of  pressing  importance,  here 
at  home,  not  to  he  forgotten  or  ptetponed.  It  is  often 
said  that  charity  should  begin  at  home.  Better  aay, 
cltarity  should  hegin  everywhere.  "While  contending  with 
the  slave  Power  on  the  broad  field  of  national  politics, 
■we  must  not  foiget  the  duty  of  protectii^  the  liberty 
of  all  who  tread  the  soil  of  Massachusetts.  [Immense 
cheering^  Early  in  Colonial  history  Massachusetts  set 
her  face  against  Slavery.  At  the  head  of  her  Declara- 
tion of  Eights  she  solemnly  asserted  that  all  men  are 
born  free  and  ecLual,  and  in  the  same  Declaration  snr- 
rounded  the  liberties  of  all  within  her  borders  by  the 
inestimable  rights  of  Trial  by  Jury  and  Haheas  Corpus. 
Recent  events  on  her  own  soil  have  taught  the  neces- 
sity of  new  safeguards  to  these  great  principles,  —  to 
the  end  that  Massachusetts  may  not  be  the  vassal  of 
Soiith  Carolina  and  Virginia,  that  the  Slave-Hunter 
may  not  range  at  wiU  among  us,  and  that  the  liberties 
of  all  may  not  be  violated  with  impunity. 

I  ajn  admonished  that  I  must  not  dwell  longer  on 
these  things.  Suffice  it  to  say  that  our  duties  in 
National  and  State  affairs  are  identical,  and  may  be 
described  by  the  same  formula:  In  the  one  case  to 
put  the  National  Government,  in  all  its  departments, 
and  in  the  other  case  the  State  Government,  in  all  its 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT  THE  PRESENT   CRISIS.  461 

departments,  openly,  actively,  and  perpetually  on  the 
side  of  Freedom.     [Zoud  applause.] 

Having  considered  what  our  duties  are,  the  question 
now  presses,  Bow  shall  they  be  performed  ?  —  by  what 
agency,  by  what  instrumentality,  in  what  way  ? 

The  most  obvious  way  is  bj  choosing  men  to  repre- 
sent us  in  the  National  Government,  and  also  at  home, 
who  will  recognize  these  duties,  and  be  ever  loyal  to 
them  [cheers], — men  who  at  Washington  will  not  shiink 
from  conflict  with  Slavery,  and  also  other  men  who  at 
home  in  Massachusetts  will  not  shrink  from  the  same 
conflict  when  the  Slave-Hunter  appears.  [Lmul  ap- 
plaim,and  cries  of  "Good!  'good.'"]  In  the  choice  of 
men  we  are  driven  to  the  organization  of  parties ;  and 
here  the  question  arises,  By  what  form  of  organization, 
or  by  what  party,  can  these  men  be  best  secured  ? 
Surely  not  by  the  Democratic  party,  as  at  present  con- 
stituted \lmigMer\ :  though,  if  this  party  were  true  to 
its  name,  pregnant  with  human  rights,  it  would  leave 
little  to  be  desired.  In  this  party  there  are  doubtless 
individuals  anxious  to  do  all  in  their  power  against 
Slavery ;  but  induce  me  in  saying,  that,  so  long  as  they 
continue  members  of  a  party  which  upholds  the  Ne- 
braska Bill,  they  can  do  very  little.  [Applatise  and 
laughter.]  What  may  we  expect  from  the  Whig  party  ? 
[A  voice, "  Hesolutiom."]  ■  If  more  might  he  expected  from 
the  Whig  party  than  the  Democratic  party,  candor  must 
attribute  much  of  the  difference  to  the  fact  that  the 
Whigs  ai*  out  of  power,  while  the  Democmts  are  in 
power.  [Long  continued  cheers^  If  the  cases  were 
reversed,  and  the  Whigs  were  in  power,  as  in  1850, 
I  fear,  that,  notwithstanding  the  ardor  of  individuals 


■cibyGoogIc 


462  DUTIES   OF   MASSACHUSETTS 

and  the  Resolutions  of  Conventions  [greai  li 
made,  I  fear,  too  often,  merely  to  be  broken,  —  the 
party  might  be  brought  to  sustain  an  outrage  as  great 
as  the  fugitive  Slave  Bill  [Zaughter  and  applause.'] 
But,  without  dwelling,  on  these  things  (to  which  I 
allude  with  difldence,  and,  I  trust,  in  no  uncharitable 
temper  or  partisan  spirit),  I  desire  to  say  that  no 
party  which  caUs  itself  National,  according  to  the  com- 
mon acceptation  of  the  word,  —  which  leans  upon  a 
slaveholding  wing  {cheers],  or  is  in  combination  with 
slaveholders  {eheers\,  —  can  at  this  time  be  true  to  Mas- 
sachusetts. {Great  applause.]  And  the  reason  is  obvi- 
ous. It  can  be  presented  so  as  to  penetrate  the  most 
common  understanding.  The  essential  element  of  smcA 
a  party,  wJtMlier  declared  or  concealed,  is  Compromise ; 
but  <mr  duties  require  all  comtittitional  opposition  to 
Slavery  and  the  Slave  Power,  without  Comproinise. 
["  That 's  it  !  "  "  Good  !  good ! "]  It  is  difftcult,  then,  to 
see  how  we  can  rely  upon  the  Whig  party. 

To  the  true-hearted,  magnanimous  citizens  ready  to 
place  Freedom  above  Party,  and  their  Country  above 
Politicians,  I  appeal.  [Immense  cheering^  Let  them 
leave  old  parties,  and  blend  in  an  organization  which, 
without  compromise,  will  maintain  the  good  cause 
surely  to  the  end.  Here  in  Massachusetts  a  large , 
majority  concur  in  sentiment  on  Slavery,  —  a  large 
majority  desire  the  overthrow  of  the  Slave  Power. 
These  must  not  scatter  their  votes,  but  unite  in  one 
firm,  consistent  phalanx  {applause],  whose  triumph  will 
constitute  an  epoch  of  Freedom,  not  only  in  this  Com- 
monwealth, but  throughout  the  land.  Such  an  organ- 
ization is  presented  by  this  Republican  Convention, 
which  announces   its   purpose   to   cooperate   with   the 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT  THE  PRESEST  CRISIS.  463 

friends  of  Freedom  iu  other  States.  [Cheers.]  Aa 
EEPUBLICANS,  we  go  forth  to  encounter  the  OU- 
garchs  of  Slavery.     {Great  applause.] 

Throi^h  this  organization  we  shall  secure  the  elec- 
tion of  men  who,  unseduced  Mid  unterrified,  will  at 
Washington  uphold  the  principles  of  Freedom,  —  and 
also  here  at  home,  in  our  own  community,  by  example, 
influence,  and  vote,  will  help  inv^rate  Massachusetts, 
I  might  go  further,  and  say  that  by  no  other  organiza- 
tion can  we  reasonably  hope  to  obtain  such  men,  iinless 
in  rare  and  exceptional  cases. 

Men  are  but  instruments.  It  will  not  be  enough  to 
choose  those  who  are  loyal.  Other  things  must  be 
done  here  at  home.  In  the  first  place,  all  existing  laws 
for  the  protection  of  human  freedom  must  be  rigorously 
enforced  [applause,  and  cries  of  " Good !"];  and  since 
these  are  found  inadequate,  there  must  be  new  laws 
for  this  purpose  within  the  limits  of  the  Constitution. 
Massaehiisetta  will  do  well  in  following  Vermont,  which 
by  special  law  places  the  fugitive  slave  under  the  safe- 
guard of  Trial  by  Jury  and  the  writ  of  Habeas  Corpus. 
But  a  Legislature  tnie  to  Freedom  will  not  fail  in  reme- 
dies. [Applause.]  A  simple  prohibition,  declaring  that 
no  person,  holding  the  commission  of  Massachusetts  as 
Justice  of  the  Peace,  or  other  magistrate,  shall  assume 
to  act  as  a  Slave-Hunting  Commissioner,  or  as  counsel 
of  any  Slave-Hunter,  under  some  proper  penalty,  would 
go  far  to  render  the  existing  Slave  Act  inoperative. 
[Applause.]  There  are  not  many  so  fond  of  this  base 
trade  as  to  continue  in  it,  when  the  Commonwealth  sets 
upon  it  a  legislative  brand. 

Besides  more  rigorous  legislation,  Public  Opinion 
must  be  invoked  to  step  forward  and  throw  over  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


464  DUTIES    OF   MASSACHUSETTS 

fugitive  its  protecting  tegia.  A  Slave-Hunter  will  tben 
be  a  by-word  and  reproach ;  and  a!l  his  instruments, 
especially  every  one  who  volunteers  in  this  vileueas 
without  positive  oblij^ation  of  law,  will  naturally  he 
regarded  as  part  of  his  pack,  and  share  the  ignominy 
of  the  chief  hunter.  [Laughter  and  cheers.]  And  now, 
from  authentic  example,  diuwn  out  of  recent  history, 
learn  how  the  Slave- Huiitei'  may  be  palsied  by  contri- 
tion. I  take  the  story  from  late  letters  on  Keapolitan 
aftairs  by  the  eminent  English  statesman,  Mr.  Glad- 
stone, who  has  copied  it  from  an  Italian  writer.  A  most 
successful  member  of  the  NeapoHtan  police,  Bolza,  of 
the  hateful  tribe  known  as  sbirri,  whose  official  duties 
involved  his  own  personal  d^^ation  and  the  loathing 
of  others,  has  left  a  i-ecord  of  the  acute  sense  retained 
of  his  shame  hy  even  such  a  man.  "  I  absolutely 
forbid  my  heirs,"  says  this  penitent  official,  "to  allow 
any  mark,  of  whatever  kind,  to  be  placed  over  the  spot 
of  my  burial,  —  much  more  any  inscription  or  epitaph. 
I  recommend  my  dearly  beloved  wife  to  impress  upon 
my  children  the  injunction,  that,  in  soliciting  any  em- 
ployment from  Government,  they  shall  ask  for  it  else- 
where than  in  the  executive  police,  and  not,  unless  un- 
der extiBordinary  circumstances,  to  give  her  consent  to 
the  marriage  of  any  of  my  daughters  with  a  member  of 
that  service."  ^  Thus  testifies  tlie  Italian  instrument 
of  legal  wrong.  Let  public  opinion  here  in  Massachu- 
setts once  put  forth  its  might,  and  every  instrument 
of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act  wiU  feel  a  kindred  shame. 
[(h'eat  applause.]     They  wiU  resign,     AVhen,  under  the 

1  Two  Letters  to  the  Earl  of  Abenteen,  on  the  State  Prosecntlons  of  (he 
Neapolitiin  Governiaent,by  theRiglit  Hon.  W.  E.  Glailstone,  (Loudon,  ISSl,) 
Letter  IL  p.  46, 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT  THE  PEESENT   CRISIS.  465 

heartless  Charles  the  Second  of  England,  the  Act  of 
Uniformity  went  into  operation,  upwards  of  two  thou- 
sand pulpita  were  vacated  hy  the  voluntary  withdrawal 
of  men  who  thought  it  better  to  face  starvation  than 
treachery  to  their  Master.  Here  is  an  example  for  us. 
Let  m^istrates  and  officers,  called  to  enforce  a  cruel 
injustice,  take  notice. 

It  is  sometimes  gravely  u^ed,  that,  since  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  has  affirmed  the  constitu- 
tionality of  the  Fugitive  Act,  there  only  remains  to  us, 
in  all  places,  whether  in  puhhc  station  or  in  private 
life,  the  duty  of  absolute  submission.  Yes,  Sir,  that  is 
the  assumption,  which  you  will  perceive  is  applied  to 
the  humblest  citizen  who  holds  no  office  and  has  taken 
no  oath  to  support  the  Constitution,  as  well  as  to  the 
public  servant  who  is  under  the  special  obligations  of 
an  official  oath.  Now,  without  stopping  to  consider  tlie 
soundness  of  the  judgment  affirming  the  constitutional- 
ity of  this  Act,  let  me  say  that  the  Constitution,  as  I 
understand  it,  exacta  no  such  passive  ohedience.  In  tak- 
ing the  oath  to  support  the  Constitution,  it  is  as  I  un- 
derstand it,  and  not  as  other  men  understand  it.  [Zoud 
applause.J 

In  adopting  this  rule,  first  authoritatively  enunciated 
by  Andrew  Jackson,  when,  as  President  of  the  United 
States,  in  the  face  of  the  Supreme  Court,  he  asserted 
the  unconstitutionality  of  the  Bank,  I  desire  to  be  un- 
derstood as  not  acting  hastily.  Let  me  add,  that,  if  it 
needed  otlier  authority  in  its  support,  it  has  the  sanction 
also  of  the  distinguished  Cabinet  by  which  he  was  then 
suiTounded,  among  whom  were  that  unsurpassed  jurist, 
Edward  livingston.  Secretary  of  State,  and  that  still  liv- 
ing exemplar  of  careful  learning  and  wisdom,  Eoger  B, 


■cibyGoogIc 


466  DUTIES   OF  MASSACHUSETTS 

Taney,  then  Attorney- General,  now  Chief-Justice  of  the 
United  States.  Beyond  these,  it  has  the  unquestion- 
able authority  of  Thomas  Jefferson,  by  whom  it  was 
asserted  again  and  again  as  a  rule  of  conduct.  Thus,  if 
any  person  at  this  day  be  disposed  to  deal  sliai'ply  with 
me  on  accoujit  of  the  suppoit  which  1  now  most  con- 
scientiously give  to  this  rule,  let  him  remember  that  his 
thrusts  win  pierce  not  only  myself,  the  humblest  of  its 
suppoi'ters,  but  also  the  great  fame  of  Andrew  Jackson 
and  of  Thomas  Jeflerson, — patriots  both  of  eminent  life 
and  authority,  on  whose  Atlantean  shoulders  this  prin- 
ciple of  Constitutional  Law  will  ever  firmly  rest. 

e  is  in  harmony  with  autliority.  From  the 
y  of  the  case  I  must  swear  to  support  the  Con- 
stitution either  as  I  do  wnderstand  if  or  as  /  do  not 
understand  it.  [Laughter.]  But  the  absurdity  of  dan- 
gling on  the  latter  horn  of  the  dilemma  compels  me  to 
take  the  fonner,  and  there  is  a  natural  end  of  the  ar- 
gument. [Great  laughter  and  cheers.']  Is  there  a  per- 
son in  Congress  or  out  of  it,  in  the  National  Goveni- 
ment  or  State  Government,  who,  when  this  inevitable 
alternative  is  presented,  will  venture  to  say  tlmt  he 
swears  to  support  the  Constitution  as  lie  does  not  un- 
derstand it  ?  [Laughter  and  applause^  The  supposition 
is  too  preposterous.  But  let  me  ask  gentlemen  disposed 
to  abandon  their  own  understanding  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, and  to  siibmit  their  conscience  to  the  standard  of 
other  men.  By  whose  understanding  do  they  swear? 
Surely  not  by  that  of  the  President :  this  is  not  al- 
leged :  but  by  the  understanding  of  the  Supreme  Court. 
In  other  words,  to  this  Court,  being  at  present  nine  per- 
sons, ~~  represented  by  a  simple  majority,  it  may  he  of  (me 
only,  —  is  accorded  the  power  of  fastening  such  inter- 


■cibyGooglc 


AT  THE  PEESENT  CRISIS.  4G7 

pretation  as  tliey  see  fit  upon  any  part  of  the  Constitu- 
tion, —  adding  to  it,  or  subtracting  from  it,  or  positively 
varying  its  requirements, — actually  making  and  unmak- 
ing the  Constitution ;  and  to  their  work  all  good  citi- 
zens must  bow,  as  of  equal  authority  with  the  original 
iuatrament,  ratified  by  solemn  votes  of  the  whole  peo- 
ple !  \6r6at  applause^  If  this  be  so,  the  oath  to  sup- 
port the  Constitution  is  hardly  less  offensive  than  the 
famous  "et  eietera"  oath  devised  by  Aichbishop  Laud, 
where  the  subject  swore  to  certain  specified  things,  with 
an  "  &e."  added,  Such  an  oath  I  have  not  taken. 
["  Good  !  good ! "]  An  old  poet  anticipates  my  objec- 
tion:— 

"  Who  swaars'  ^c.  swears  more  onllis  at  once 

Thau  Carbems  out  of  his  triple  sooiicai 

Who  viowa  it  well  with  the  same  eye  beholds 

The  old  half  serpent  hi  bis  numerous  folds 

Accui'sad."  ' 

The  power  of  our  Supreme  Court  is  great,  and  its 
sphere  is  vast;  but  there  are  limits  to  its  power  and 
its  sphere.  According  to  the  Constitution,  "the  judi- 
cial power  sliall  extend  to  all  eases  in  law  and  equity, 
arising  under  the  Constitution,  the  laws,  of  the  United 
States,  and  treaties  " ;  but  it  by  no  means  follows  that 
the  interpretation  of  the  Constitution,  incident  to  tlie 
trial  of  these  "  cases,"  is  final.  Of  coiu^e,the  judgment 
in  the  "  case  "  actually  pending  is  final,  as  the  settle- 
ment of  a  controvei-sy,  for  weal  or  woe,  to  the  litigating 
parties;  but  as  a  precedent  it  is  not"final  even  on  the 
Supreme  Court  itself.  WlieE  cited  afterwards,  it  will 
be  regarded  with  respect  as  an  interpretation  of  the  Con- 
stitution, and,  if  nothing  appears  against  it,  of  control- 
ling authority ;  but,  at  any  day,  in  any  litigation,  at  the 

1  Clevetend.    See  Hudlbras,  ed.  Grey,  Part  I.  Cnnto  2,  Note  to  t.  650. 


■cibyGoogIc 


468  DUTIES  OF  MASSACHUSETTS 

trial  of  any  "  case,"  it  will  be  within  the  unquestion- 
able competency  of  the  Court  to  review  its  own  decis- 
ion, so  far  as  it  establishes  any  interpretation  of  the  don- 
stitution.  If  the  Court  itself  be  not  constrained  by  its 
own  precedents.  Low  can  coordinate  branches,  imder 
oath  to  support  the  Constitution,  and,  like  the  Court 
itself,  called  incidentally  to  interpret  the  Constitu- 
tion, be  constrained  by  them  ?  In  both  instances,  the 
power  to  interpret  is  simply  incident  to  other  princi- 
pal duties,  as  the  trial  of  "cases,"  the  making  of  laws, 
or  the  administration  of  government;  and  it  seems  as 
plainly  incident  to  a  "  case "  of  legislation  or  of  ad- 
ministration as  to  a  "case"  of  litigation.  And  on  this 
view  I  shall  act  with  entire  confidence,  under  the  oath 
I  have  taken. 

Por  myself,  let  me  say,  that  I  hold  ju(%es,  and  espe- 
cially the  Supreme  Court,  in  much  respect ;  but  I  am 
too  familiar  with  the  history  of  judicial  proceedings  to 
regard  them  with  any  superstitious  reverence.  [&ras«- 
tion^  Judges  are  but  men,  and  in  all  ages  have  shown 
a  fuU  share  of  human  frailty.  Alas !  alas  !  the  worst 
crimes  of  history  have  been  perpetrated  under  their 
sanction.  The  blood  of  martyrs  and  of  patriots,  cryii^ 
from  the  ground,  summons  them  to  judgment.  It  was 
a  judicial  tribunal  which  condemned  Socrates  to  drink 
the  fatrd  hemlock,  and  which  pushed  the  Saviour  bare- 
foot over  the  pavements  of  Jerus^em,  bending  beneath 
his  cross.  It  was  a  judicial  tribunal  which,  against  the 
testimony  and  entreaties  of  her  father,  surrendered  the 
fair  Virginia  as  a  slave,  —  which  arrested  the  teachings  of 
the  great  Apostle  to  the  Gentiles,  and  sent  him  in  bonds 
from  Judtea  to  Rome,  — which,  in  the  name  of  the  Old 
Kelson,  persecuted  the  saints  and  fathers  of  the  Chris- 


■cibyGooglc 


AT  THE  PEESEST   CRISIS.  469 

tifiii  Church,  and  adjudged  them  to  a  martyr's  death,  in  all 
its  moat  dreadful  forma,  —  and  afterwards,  in  the  name  of 
the  New  Eeligion,  enforced  the  tortures  of  the  Inq^uisi- 
tion,  amidst  the  shrieks  and  agonies  of  its  victims,  wliile 
it  compelled  Galileo  to  declare,  in  solemn  denial  of 
the  great  truth  he  had  disclosed,  that  the  earth  did  not 
move  round  the  sun.  It  was  a  judicial  tribunal  which, 
in  France,  during  the  long  reign  of  her  monarchs,  lent 
itself  to  be  the  instrument  of  every  tyranny,  as  during  the 
brief  Eeign  of  Terror  it  did  not  hesitate  to  stand  forth  the 
unpitying  accessary  of  the  unpitying  guillotine.  Ay, 
Sir,  it  was  a  judicial  tribunal  in  England,  surrounded  by 
all  forms  of  law,  which  sanctioned  every  despotic  caprice 
of  Henry  the  Eighth,  from  the  unjust  divorce  of  his 
queen  to  the  beheading  of  Sir  Thomas  More,  —  which 
lighted  the  fires  of  persecution  that  glowed  at  Oxford 
and  Smithfield,  over  tlie  cinders  of  I^atimer,  Ridley,  and 
John  Eogers,  —  which,  after  elaborate  argument,  upheld 
the  fatal  tyranny  of  ship  money  against  the  patriot 
i&sistance  of  Hampden,  ^ — which,  in  defiance  of  justice 
and  humanity,  sent  Sidney  and  Eussell  to  the  block,  — 
which  persistently  enforced  the  laws  of  Conformity  that 
our  Puritan  fathers  persistently  refused  to  obey,  and 
afterwards,  with  Jeffreys  on  the  bench,  crimsoned  the 
pages  of  English  history  with  massacre  and  murder, 
even  with  the  blood  of  innocent  women.  Ay,  Sir,  it 
was  a  judicial  tribunal  in  our  own  countiy,  surrounded 
by  all  forms  of  law,  wliich  hung  -witches  at  Salem, — 
which  affirmed  tlie  constitutionality  of  the  Stamp  Act, 
while  it  admonished  "jurors  and  people"  to  obey, — 
and  which  now,  in  our  day,  lends  its  sanction  to  the 
unutterable  atrocity  of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act.  [Long 
eontiimed  applause,  and  three  che&rsfoT  Siimne^:'\ 


■cibyGoogIc 


470  DUTIES   OF  MASSACHUSETTS 

Of  course  judgments  of  courts  are  Mnding  upon  in- 
ferior tribunals,  and  their  own  executive  officers,  whose 
virtue  does  not  prompt  them  to  resign  rather  than  aid 
in  executing  an  unjust  mandate.  Over  all  citizens, 
■whether  in  pubhc  or  private  station,  they  will  natural- 
ly exert,  as  precedents,  an  impartial  jniluence.  This  I 
admit.  But  no  man,  who  is  not  lost  to  self-respect,  and 
ready  to  ahandon  that  manhood  which  is  shown  in  the 
Heaven-directed  countenance,  will  voluntarily  aid  in 
enforcing  a  judgment  which  in  conscience  he  believes 
\vrong.  He  will  not  hesitate  "  to  obey  God  mther  than 
men,"  and  calmly  abide  the  peril  he  provokes.  Not 
lightly,  not  rashly,  wiU  he  take  the  grave  responsibihty 
of  open  dissent ;  but  if  the  occasion  requires,  he  will 
not  fail  Pains  and  penalties  may  be  endured,  but  wrong 
must  not  be  done,  [Cheers.]  "Where  I  cannot  obey 
I  am  willing  to  suffisr,"  was  the  exclamation  of  the 
author  of  "  Pilgrim's  Progress,"  when  imprisoned  for 
disobedience  to  an  earthly  statute.  Elsewhere  I  have 
said  what  I  now  repeat  and  proclaim  on  the  house-top. 
Better  suffer  injustice  than  do  it.  Better  be  even  the 
poor  slave  returned  to  bondage  than  the  unhappy  Com- 
missioner.    [Applause  and  sensation!] 

I  repeat,  judges  are  but  men,  and  I  know  no  differ- 
ence between  the  claim  of  power  now  made  for  them 
and  that  other  insulting  pretension  put  forth  sometimes 
in  the  name  of  a  king  and  sometimes  of  a  people, 
listen  to  what  King  James  of  Ei^land  once  wrote: 
"It  is  atheism  and  blasphemy  to  dispute  what  Grod 
can  do :  good  Christians  content  themselves  with  his 
will  revealed  in  his  word.  So  it  is  presumption  and 
high  contempt  in  a  subject  to  dispute  what  a  king  can 
do,  or  say  that  a  king  cannot  do  this  or  that :  but  rest 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT  THE  PRESENT  CEISIS.  471 

in  that  wliich  is  the  king's  revealed  will  in  his  law." ' 
Thus  wrote  one  who  was  called  "the  wisest  fool  of 
Christendom,"  And  so  we  are  to  rest  in  that  popular 
will  revealed  in  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  and  ratified 
hy  the  Supreme  Court.  The  rabble  of  revolutionary 
France,  in  a  spirit  kindred  to  that  of  King  James, 
cried  out,  as  the  executioner's  cart  tracked  its  way  in 
blood,  "We  can  do  what  we  please," — adding,  "There 
is  no  God."  Of  course,  if  there  were  no  God,  they 
could  not  do  as  they  pleased ;  nor  could  the  king, 
whose  pretension  for  himself  was  no  better  than  that 
of  the  rabble.  But  there  is  a  God,  to  be  obeyed  in 
all  things,  although  kings,  people,  and  even  courts,  as- 
sert tlie  contrary. 

The  whole  dogma  of  passive  ohedieTi^e  must  be  re- 
jected, whatever  guise  it  assumes,  under  whatever  alias 
it  skullcs,  —  whether  in  tyrannical  usurpations  of  king, 
parliament,  or  judicial  tribunal,  —  whether  m  exploded 
theories  of  Sir  Eobert  Filmer,  or  rampant  assumptions 
of  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act.  The  lights  of  the  civil 
power  are  limited ;  there  are  things  beyond  its  prov- 
ince ;  there  are  matters  out  of  its  control ,  theie  are 
cases  in  which  the  faithful  citizen  may  say,  —  ay,  must 
say, — "I  will  not  obey."  One  of  the  highest  flights  of 
Mirabeau  was,  when,  addressing  the  National  Assembly 
of  France,  he  protested  against  a  law  then  pending,  and 
exclaimed,  "  If  you  make  such  a  law,  I  swear  never  to 
obey  it!"^  No  man  now  responds  to  the  words  of 
"If  a  king  bid  a  man  be  a  villain,  he  is 


1  Speech  fn  the  Stnr-Cliamber,  Jmie  20,  1616:  Works  of  the  Most  High 
and  Might}'  Prince,  James,  by  Ihe  Grace  of  Goit  King  of  Grent  Britain,  &o., 
(London,  1616,  folio,)  p.  657.    Sea  tdso  Fincli's  Law,  p.  SI. 

s  Projat  de  Loi  eur  les  Emigrations,  28  i'Svrier,  ir91:  (Euvres,  (Paris, 
1884,}  Tom.  III.  p  m. 


■cibyGoogIc 


472  DUTIES   OF  MASSACHUSETTS 

bound  by  the  indenture  of  his  oath  to  be  one,"  Nor,  in 
this  age  of  civilization  and  liberty,  wUl  any  pmdent 
reasoner,  who  duly  considers  the  tights  of  conscience, 
claim  for  any  earthly  magistrate  or  tribunal,  howsoever 
styled,  a  power  which  the  loftiest  monarch  of  a  Chris- 
tian throne,  wearing  on  his  brow  "  the  round  and  top  of 
sovereignty,"  dare  not  assert. 

On  this  twofold  conclusion  I  rest,  and  do  not  doubt 
the  final  result.  The  citizen  who  has  sworn  to  support 
the  Constitution  is  constrained  to  support  it  simply  as 
he  understands  it.  The  citizen  whose  private  life  has 
kept  him  from  assuming  the  obligations  of  official  oath 
may  bravely  set  at  nought  the  unrighteous  ruling  of  a 
magistrate,  and,  so  doing,  he  will  serve  justice,  though 
he  expose  himself  to  stem  penalties. 

Fellow-citizens  of  Massachusetts,  our  own  loca,l  his- 
tory is  not  without  encouragement.  In  early  colonial 
days,  the  law  against  witchcraft,  now  so  abhorrent  to 
reason  and  conscience,  was  regarded  as  constitutional 
and  binding,  — precisely  as  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act,  not 
less  abhorrent  to  reason  and  conscience,  is  regarded  as 
constitutional  and  binding.  A  special  Coui-t  of  Oyer  and 
Terminer,  with  able  judges,  whose  names  ai'e  entwined 
with  our  histoiy,  enforced  this  law  at  Salem  by  the  ex- 
ecution of  nineteen  persons  as  witches,  —  precisely  as 
petty  magistrates,  acting  under  sanction  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States,  and  also  of  the  Supreme 
Court  of  Massachusetts,  have  enforced  the  Fi^tive  Act 
by  the  reduction  of  two  human  beings  to  slavery.  The 
clergy  of  Massachusetts,  particularly  near  Boston,  and 
also  Harvard  College,  were  for  the  law.  "  Witchcraft," 
shouted  Cotton  Mather  from  the  pulpit,  "is  the  most 
nefandous  high  treason,"  "a  capital  crime,"  —  even  as 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT  THE  PRKSENl   CRISIS.  473 

opposition  to  the  Fugitive  Act  has  l^een  denounced  as 
"  treason,"     [Laughter.'] 

But  the  law  against  witchcraft  was  not  triumphant 
long.  The  General  Court  of  the  Province  fii'st  became 
penitent,  and  asked  pardon  of  God  for  "  all  the  errors 
of  his  servants  and  people  in  the  late  tragedy."  Jury- 
men united  in  condemning  and  lamenting  the  delusion 
to  which  they  had  yielded  under  the  decision  of  the 
judges,  and  acknowledged  that  they  had  brought  the 
reproach  of  wrongful  bloodshed  on  their  native  land. 
Sewall,  one  of  the  judges,  and  author  of  the  early  tract 
against  Slavery,  "The  Selling  of  Joseph,"  whose  name 
lives  freshly  in  his  liberty-loving  descendant  [Hon.  S. 
E. .  Sewall]  [applause],  stood  up  in  Ms  place  at  church, 
before  the  congregation,  and  implored  the  prayers  of  the 
people,  that  the  errors  he  had  committed  might  not  be 
visited  by  the  judgments  of  an  avei^ing  God  on  his 
country,  his  family,  or  himself  And  now,  in  a  manu- 
script diary  of  this  departed  judge,  may  be  read,  on  the 
inai^;in  against  the  contemporary  record,  in  his  own 
handwriting,  words  of  saddest  interjection  and  sorrow ' 
Vm .'  va;!  vm !  Woe !  woe !  woe  1 '.     [Sensation^ 

The  parallel  between  the  law  against  witchcraft  and 
the  Fugitive  Act  is  not  yet  complete.  It  remains  for 
our  L^islature,  successor  of  that  original  General  Court, 
to  lead  the  penitential  march.  {Zaughter.']  In  the 
slave  cases  there  have  been  no  jurymen  to  recant 
[laugMer] ;  and  it  is  too  much,  perhaps,  to  expect  any 
magistrate  who  sanctioned  the  cruelty  to  imitate  by 
public  penitence  the  magnanimity  of  other  days.   Yet  it 

1  Holmes,  Annnla,  Vol.  I,  p.  MO,  note.  In  eirailar  spirit,  John  WinUirep, 
t!ie  enrly  Goramor  of  Masaaoliusetts,  on  his  death-bed  refused  to  sign  (ui 
order  to  banish  a  heterodox  .person,  saying,  "I  hsve  done  too  much  of  tlmt 
work  alrendj-."  — Hutchinson,  History  of  Massachusetts,  Vol.  I.  p.  143. 


■cibyGoogIc 


474  DUTIES   OF  MASSACHUSETTS 

is  not  impossible  that  future  generations  may  be  permit- 
ted to  read,  in  some  newly  exhumed  diary  or  letter  by 
one  of  these  troubled  functionaries,  words  of  woe  not  im- 
like  those  wrung  from  the  soid.  of  Sewall.     [Sensation.] 

Fellow-citizens,  one  word  in  conclusion  :  Be  of  good 
cheer.  ["  That 's  it  /"]  I  know  weR  the  difficulties  and 
responsibilities  of  the  contest ;  but  not  on  this  account 
do  I  bate  a  jot  of  heart  or  hope.  [Applause.]  At  this 
time,  in  out  country,  there  is  Uttle  else  to  tempt  into 
public  life  an  honest  man,  who  wishes,  by  something 
that  he  baa  done,  to  leave  the  world  better  than  he 
found  it.  There  is  little  else  to  afford  any  of  those 
satisfactions  which  an  honest  man  can  covet.  Nor  is 
there  any  cause  which  so  surely  promises  final  success. 
There  is  nothing  good  —  not  a  breathing  of  the  common 
air — which  is  not  on  our  side,  Ours,  too,  are  those 
great  allies  described  by  the  poet,  — 

"  Exultations,  Bgonios, 
And  love,  and  man's  unooiiqaomlile  mind." 

And  there  are  favoring  circumstances  peculiar  to  the 
present  moment.  By  the  passage  of  the  Nebraska  Bill, 
and  the  Boston  kidnapping  case,  the  tyranny  of  the 
Slave  Power  is  unmistakably  manifest,  while  at  the 
same  time  all  compromises  with  Slavery  are  happily 
dissolved,  so  that  Freedom  stands  face  to  face  with  its  foe. 
The  pulpit,  too,  released  from  ill-omened  silence,  now 
thunders  for  Freedom,  as  in  the  olden  time.  [Cheers.] 
It  belongs  to  Massachusetts,  nurse  of  the  men  and  prin- 
ciples which  made  the  earliest  Revolution,  to  vow  her- 
self anew  to  her  ancient  faith,  as  she  lifts  herself  to  the 
great  stru^le.  Her  place  now,  as  then,  is  in  the  van, 
at  the  head  of  the  battle.     [Sensation.]     To  sustain  this 


■cibyGoogIc 


AT  THE  PRESENT   CRISIS.  475 

advanced  position  witii  proper  inflexibility,  tliree  tilings 
are  needed  by  our  beloved  Commouwealtli,  in  all  her 
depaitments  of  government,  —  tlie  same  three  things 
which  once,  in  Faneuil  Hall,  I  ventured  to  say  were 
needed  by  every  representative  of  the  North  at  Wash- 
ington. The  first  is  backbone  [applause]  ;  the  second  is 
BACKBONE  [renmoed  applause] ;  and  the  third  is  BACK- 
BONE. [L<mg  continued  cheering,  and  fhne  cheers  for 
"  Backhone."}  With  these  Massachusetts  will  he  felt 
and  respected,  as  a  positive  force  in  the  National  Gov- 
ernment [a^lause],  while  at  home,  on  her  own  soil,  free 
at  last  in  reality  as  in  name  [applause],  all  her  people, 
from  Boston  islands  to  Berkshire  hiUs,  and  from  the 
sands  of  Barnstable  to  the  northern  line,  will  unite  in 
the  cry,  — 

"No  BlavB-hunt  inoncbordersl  no  pirate  on  onr  strand! 
No  fotlora  in  the  Bay  State!  no  slave  upon  our  lanill  " 


;db,Googlc 


THE  GOOD  FAEMER  AND  THE  GOOD  CITIZEN. 


Letter  to  the  Norfolk  Aghicultdral  Societt, 
Septembeb  25,  1854. 


Another  voice  against  iha  Fugitive  Slave  Act. 

Boston,  September  25,  1854. 

MY  EEAK  SIR,  — I  am  grateful  for  the  honor 
done  me  hy  the  invitation  of  your  Society,  and 
also  for  the  kind  manner  in  which  you  have  conveyed  it. 
But  another  engagement  promises  to  occupy  my  time 
so  as  to  deprive  me  of  the  pleasm'e  thus  kindly  offered 

From  the  mother  earth  we  may  derive  many  lessons, 
and  I  doubt  not  they  will  spring  up  abundantly  in  the 
footprints  of  the  Norfolk  Agricultural  Society.  There 
is  one  that  comes  to  my  mind  at  this  moment,  and 
which  is  of  perpetual  force. 

The  good  farmer  obeys  the  natural  laws ;  nor  does  he 
impotently  attempt  to  set  up  any  behest  of  man  against 
the  ordinances  of  God,  determining  day  and  night,  sum- 
mer and  winter,  smishine  and  rain.  The  good  citizen 
win  imitate  the  good  fanner;  nor  will  he  impotently 
attempt  to  set  up  any  statute  of  man  against  the  ordi- 
nances of  God,  which  determine  good  and  evil,  right  and 
wrong,  justice  and  injustice.  Let  me  express  these  cor- 
relative ideas  in  a  sentiment  which  I  trust  may  be  wel- 
come at  your  festival :  — 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE   GOOD   FAEMEE  AND   THE   GOOD   CITIZEN.       477 

The  Good  Farmer  and  the  Good  Citizen :  Acting  iu 
conformity  with  the  laws  of  God,  rather  than  the  stat- 
utes of  man,  they  know  tliat  in  this  way  only  can  time 
prosperity  be  obtained. 

Believe  me,  dear  Sir,  with  much  respect. 
Very  faithfully  yours, 

Chaeles  Sumner. 

Hos.  Mahshall  V.  WiLDEE. 


■cibyGoogIc 


TEE  rDGITIVI  SLAVE  ACT  TO  BE  BISOBEim 


Letter  to  a  CoMHiTrEE  at  Syhachsb,  ITbw  York, 
Sbptbmbeh  28, 1854. 


The  escape  of  the  Fugitive  Skvc,  Jerry,  at  Syracuse, 
orated  at  a  public  meeting,  to  which  Mr.  Sumner  was  invited.  His 
answer  was  [lublished  at  the  time  aa  "li'om  a  man  who  is  not  afraid  to 
speak  out." 

Boston,  September  28,  185i. 

DEAR  SIR,— I  cannot  be  with  you  at  Syracuse,  ac- 
cording to  the  invitation  with  which  I  have  been 
honored  ;,hut  I  shall  rejoice  at  every  word  uttered  there 
■which  helps  to  lay  bare  the  true  nature  of  Slavery,  and 
its  legitimate  offspring,  the  Fugitive  Slave  EiU, 

That  atrocious  enactment  has  no  sanction  in  the  Con- 
stitution of  the  United  States  or  in  the  law  of  God. 
It  shocks  both,  The  good  citizen,  at  all  personal  hazard, 
wiLL  refuse  to  obey  it. 

Yours  very  faithfully, 

Charles  Sumner. 


■cibyGoogIc 


POSITION  AND  DUTIES  OF  THE  MERCHANT, 


GEANVILLE     SHAEP. 


Valuti  in  spoculnm. 


;db,Googlc 


Herb  was  anotlier  effort  to  obtain  a  hearing  for  unwelcome  truth. 
While  poi-traying  the  life  and  character  of  Granville  Sharp,  Mr.  Sam- 
nor  was  saying  what  he  had  most  at  hcait  on  Slavery,  and  exposing 
that  swiftness  which  had  been  shown  here  in  support  of  the  Fngitive 
Slave  Act.  Describing  the  simple  championship  of  the  Englishman, 
he  presented  an  example  for  imitation.  Showing  how  Slavery  had  been 
overturned  in  England,  he  exhibited  the  essential  rule  of  interpreta- 
tion, by  which,  in  the  absence  of  precise  words  of  sanction,  it  tieces- 
sarilj  beeomea  impossible.  Condemning  the  London  merchants  who 
contributed  to  snpport  this  wrong,  and  also  the  able  lawyers  who  lent 
themselves  to  the  same  cause,  he  presented  a  pietnre  where  our  merchants 
and  lawyers  might  see  themselves.  Extolling  that  conscience  which 
aaatained  Graaville  Sharp  in  his  career,  he  vindicated  all  among  us 
who  would  not  bow  before  injustice. 

The  address  was  well  received.  The  tide  was  then  taming.  Since  then 
the  lecture-room  has  been  free.  The  condition  of  the  public  mind  was 
noticed  at  the  time.  One  newspaper  said,  that  "a  Boston  audience 
of  the  kind  then  and  there  present  would  not  have  listened  t«  it  with 
patience  four  years  ago,"  —  that,  "valuable  as  the  lecture  is  on  account 
of  its  literary  merits,  its  real  importance  consists  in  mai'king  an  era  in 
Boston  opinion."  Another  paper  says,  with  enthusiasm,  "That  Mr. 
Sumner  shonld  have  delivered  such  a  lecture  before  '  the  solid  men  of 
Boston '  is  a  great,  a  sublime  (act  in  American  histoiy,"  and,  after  pro- 
ceeding in  this  strain,  concludes  with  the  remark,  that  "it  is  one  of 
the  most  striking  eiamples  of  whipping  one  set  of  people  over  tho  backs 
of  another  that  we  ever  heard  of." 


;db,Googlc 


ADDRESS. 


Mr.  President,  and  Gentlemen  of  the  Mercantile 
Library  Association  :  — 

I  HAVE  been  honored  by  an  invitation  to  deliver 
an  address,  introductory  to  the  annual  course  of  lec- 
tures which  your  Association  bountifully  contributes  to 
the  pastime,  instruction,  and  elevation  of  our  community. 
You  know.  Sir,  something  of  the  reluctance  with  which, 
i  by  other  cares,  I  undertook  this  service,  — 
;  to  kindly  and  persistent  pressure,  -which  only 
a  nature  sterner  than  mine  could  resist.  And  now  I 
am  here  to  perform  what  I  promised. 

I  am  to  address  the  Mercantile  Library  Association 
of  Boston,  numbering,  according  to  your  last  Report,  two 
thousand  and  seventy-eight  members,  and  possessing  a 
library  of  more  than  fifteen  thousand  volumes.  With 
so  many  members  and  so  many  books,  yours  is  an  in- 
stitution of  positive  power.  Two  distinct  features 
appear  in  its  name.  It  is,  primarily,  an  association  of 
persons  in  mercantile  pursuits  ;  and  it  is,  next,  an  asso- 
ciation for  the  improvement  of  its  members,  particularly 
through  books.  In  either  particnlar  it  is  entitled  to  re- 
gard. But  it  possesses  yet  another  feature,  more  inter- 
esting still,  which  does  not  appear  in  its  name.  It  is  an 
association  of  young  men,  with  hearts  yet  hospitable  to 
generous  words,  and  with  resolves  not  yet  vancLuished 


■cibyGoogIc 


482      POsmoN  and  duties  of  the  merchant, 

by  the  trials  and  temptations  of  life.  Especially  does 
this  last  coiisidemtioix  fill  me  ■with  a  deep  sense  of  the 
privilege  and  responsibility  to  which  you  have  sum- 
moned me,  I  am  aware,  that,  according  to  usage,  the 
■whole  circle  of  kno'wledge,  thought,  and  aspiration  is 
open  to  the  speaker ;  but,  as  often  as  I  have  revolved  the 
occasion  in  my  mind,  I  have  been  brought  back  to  the 
peculiar  character  of  yorn-  Association,  and  have  found 
myself  unwilling  to  touch  any  theme  not  addressed  to 
you  especially  as  merchants. 

I  might  fitly  speak  to  you  of  books ;  and  here,  while 
considering  principles  to  govern  the  student  in  his 
reading,  it  would  be  pleasant  to  dwell  on  the  profitable 
del^hts,  better  than  a  "shower  of  cent  per  cent,"  on 
the  society,  better  than  fashion  or  dissipation,  and  on 
that  completeness  of  satisfaction,  outvying  the  posses- 
sions of  wealth,  and  maldr^  the  "library  dukedom  laige 
enough," — all  of  which  ate  found  in  books.  But  Heave 
this  theme.  I  might  also  fitly  speak  to  you  of  young 
men,  their  claims  and  duties ;  and  here  again,  while  en- 
forcing the  precious  advantages  of  Occupation,  it  would 
be  pleasant  to  unfold  and  vindicate  tliat  reverence  which 
Antiquity  wisely  accorded  to  youth,  as  the  season  of 
promise  and  hope,  pregnant  with  an  uriKnown  future, 
and  therefore  to  be  watched  with  tenderness  and  care,  — 
to  show  how  in  every  young  man  the  uncertain  measure 
of  capacities  yet  undeveloped  gives  scope  to  magnificence 
of  anticipation  beyond  any  reality,  —  and  to  inquire  what 
must  be  done,  that  all  this  anticipation  may  not  wholly 
die  wMle  the  young  man  lives.  But  there  are  other 
tilings  which  beckon  me  away.  Not  on  books,  not  on 
youth  must  I  speak,  but  on  yet  another  topic,  s 
directly  by  the  name  of  your  I 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTEATED  BY 


THE  LIFE  OF  GRANVILLE  SHAEP.   483 


With  yoiTT  kind  permission,  I  shall  speak  to-night  on 
what  this  age  rec[nire3  from  the  mercantile  profession, 
or  rather,  since  nothing  is  justly  required  which  is  not 
due,  what  the  mercantile  profession  owes  to  this  age.  I 
would  show  the  principle  by  which  we  are  to  be  guided 
in  making  the  account  current  between  the  mercantile 
profession  and  Humanity,  and,  might  I  so  aspire,  hold 
up  the  Looking-Glaas  of  the  Good  Merchant.  And  since 
example  is  better  than  precept,  and  deeds  are  more  than 
words,  I  shall  exhibit  the  career  of  a  remarkable  mail, 
whose  simple  life,  beginnii^  as  apprentice  to  a  linen- 
diaper,  and  never  getting  beyond  a  clerkship,  shows 
what  may  be  accomph'shed  by  faithful,  humble  labor, 
and  reveals  precisely  those  qualities  which  in  this  age 
are  needed  to  crown  the  character  of  the  Good  Mer- 
chant. 

"I  hold  every  man  a  debtor  to  his  profession,"  was 
a  saying  of  Lord  Bacon,  repeated  by  his  contemporary 
and  rival.  Lord  Coke,  But  this  does  not  tell  the  whole 
truth  It  restricts  within  the  narrow  circle  of  a  pro- 
fession obligations  which  are  broad  and  universal  as 
humanity.  Eather  should  it.  be  said  that  every  man 
owes  a  debt  to  mankind.  In  determining  the  debt  of 
the  merchant,  we  must  first  appreciate  his  actual  posi- 
tion in  the  social  system. 

At  the  dawn  of  modem  times  trade  was  imknown. 
There  was  nothing  then  like  a  policy  of  insurance,  a 
bank,  a  bill  of  exchange,  or  even  a  promissory  note. 
The  very  term  "  chattels,"  so  comprehensive  in  its  pres- 
ent application,  yet,  when  considered  in  its  derivation 
from  the  mediEeval  Latin  catalla,  cattle,  reveals  the  nar- 
row inventory  of  personal  property  in  those  days,  when 


■cibyGoogIc 


484         rOSITIOK  AND  DDTIES   OF  THE  MERCHANT, 

"  two  hundred  sheep "  were  paid  by  a  pioiis  Countesa 
of  Anjou  for  a  coveted  volume  of  Homilies.  The  places 
of  honor  and  ;power  were  then  occupied  by  men  who 
had  distinguished  .themselves  by  the  sword,  and  were 
known  under  the  various  names  of  Knight,  Baron, 
Count,  or  —  highest  of  all  —  Duke,  Dux,  leader  in  war. 

Under  these  influences  the  feudal  system  was  oi^n- 
ized,  with  its  hierarchy  of  ranks,  in  mukial  relations  of 
dependence  and  protection ;  and  society  for  a  while  rested 
in  its  shadow.  The  steel-clad  chiefs  who  enjoyed  power 
had  a  corresponding  responsibility,  while  the  mingled 
gallantry  and  gentleness  of  chivalry  often  controlled  the 
iron  hand.  It  was  the  dukes  who  led  the  forces ;  it  was 
the  counts  or  earls  who  placed  themselves  at  the  head  of 
their  respective  counties ;  it  was  the  knights  who  went 
forth  to  do  battle  with  danger,  in  whatever  form,  wheth- 
er from  robbers  or  wild  beasts.  It  was  the  barons  of 
Runnymede  —  there  was  no  merchant  there  —  who  ex- 
torted from  King  John  that  Magna  Charta  which  laid 
the  corner-stone  of  English  and  American  liberty. 

Meanwhile  trade  made  its  humble  beginnings.  But 
for  a  long  time  the  merchant  was  of  a  despLsed  caste, 
only  next  above  the  slave  who  was  sold  as  a  chattel 
If  a  Jew,  he  was  often  compelled,  under  direful  torture, 
to  sun'cnder  his  gains ;  if  a  foreigner,  he  earned  tolera- 
tion by  inordinate  contribution  to  the  pubHc  revenue ; 
if  a  native,  he  was  treated  as  caitiff  too  mean  for  soci- 
ety, and  only  good  enoi^h  to  be  taxed.  In  the  time  of 
Chaucer  he  had  so  far  come  up,  that  he  was  admitted  to 
the  promiscuous  company,  ranging  from  knight  to  mil- 
ler, who  undertook  the  merry  pilgrimage  from  the  Ta- 
bard Inn  to  Canterbury ;  but  the  gentle  poet  satirically 
exposes  his  selfish  talk ; — 


■cibyGoogIc 


UXUSTBATED  ET  TKE  Um  .OF  CffiANVILLE  SHARP.   485 

"  His  reaons  spake  he  ful  solemppely, 

Souiiiiig  fllwoy  tlie  eticreee  of  liis  winning: 
He  wold  the  see  were  kept  for  any  thing 
Betwixen  Middelbnrgh  and  Oreweli."  1 

The  man  of  tiade  was  so  low,  that  it  took  him  long 
to  rise.  A  London  merchant,  the  famous  Greaham,  in 
the  time  of  Elizabeth,  founded  the  Eoyal  Exchange,  and 
a  college  also ;  but  trade  continued  still  a  .butt  for  jest 
and  gibe.  At  a  later  day  an  English  statute  gave  new 
security  to  the  merchant's  accounts;  but  the  contem- 
poraneous dramatists  exhibited  Mm  to  the  derision  of 
the  theatre,  and  even  the  almanacs  exposed  his  ignorant 
superstitious  by  chronicling  the  days  supposed  to  be  fa- 
vorable or  unfavorable  to  trade.  But  in  the  grand  mu- 
tations of  society  the  merchant  throve.  His  wealth  in- 
creased, his  iniluence  extended,  and  he  gradually  drew 
into  his  company  decayed  or  poverty-stricken  members 
of  feudal  families,  till  at  last  in  France  (I  do  not  forget 
the  exceptional  condition  of  Italy),  at  the  close  of  the 
seventeenth  century,  an  edict  was  put  forth,  which 
John  Locke  has  preserved  in  the  journal  of  his  travels, 
"that  those  who  merchandise,  but  do  not  use  the 
yard,  shall  not  lose  their  gentility"^  (admirable  dis- 
crimination ! ) ;  and  in  England,  at  the  close  of  the  eigh- 
teenth century,  his  former  degradation  and  growing  im- 
portance were  attested  in  the  saying  of  Dr.  Johnson, 
that  "  an  English  merchant  is  a  new  species  of  gentle- 
man."^ But  this  high  arbiter,  bending  under  feudal 
traditions,  would  not  even  then  concede  to  him  any 
merit,  —  proclaiming  that  there  were  "  no  qualities  in 
trade  that  should  entitle  a  man  to  superiority,"  — that 

1  Canterbury  Tales,  Prologue,  276-279. 

2  King's  Life  of  Loclte,  Vol.  I.  p.  104. 

»  Boswell's  Life  of  Johnson,  ed.  Croker,  ILondon,  1835,]  Vol.  II.  p.  20i, 
note,  anno  1766. 


■cibyGoogIc 


486       PoeinoN  and  duties  of  the  merchant, 

"  we  cannot  think  that  a  fellow,  hy  sitting  all  day  at  a 
desk,  is  entitled  to  get  above  us," —  and  to  the  supposi- 
tion by  his  faithful  Boswell,  that  a  merchant  might  be  a 
man  of  enlarged  mind,  the  determined  moralist  replied : 
"Why,  Sir,  we  may  suppose  any  fictitious  character; 
but  there  is  nothing  in  trade  connected  with  an  en- 
larged mind."  ^ 

In  America  feudalism  never  prevailed,  and  our  Rev- 
olution severed  the  only  cord  by  which  we  were  con- 
nected with  this  ancient  system.  It  was  fit  that  the 
Congress  which  performed  this  memorable  act  should 
have  for  its  President  a  merchant.  It  was  fit,  that,  in 
promulgating  the  Declaration  of  Independence,  by  which, 
in  the  face  of  kings,  princes,  and  nobles,  the  New  Em  was 
inaugurated,  the  education  of  the  counting-house  should 
flaunt  conspicuously  in  the  broad  and  clerkly  signature 
of  John  Hancock  Our  fathers  *'  builded  better  than 
they  knew  "  ;  and  these  things  are  typical  of  the  social 
change  then  taking  place.  By  yet  another  act,  fresh  ia 
your  recollection,  and  of  peculiar  interest  to  this  assem- 
bly, has  our  country  borne  the  same  testimony.  A  dis- 
tinguished merchant  of  Boston,  who  has  ascended  through 
all  the  gradations  of  trade,  honored  always  for  private 
virtues  as  well  as  public  abilities,  —  need  I  mention  the 
name  of  Abbott  Laweence  ?  —  has  been  sent  to  the 
Court  of  St.  James  as  ambassador  of  our  EepubHc,  and 
with  that  proud  commission,  higher  than  any  patent  of 
nobility,  taken  precedence  of  nobles  in  that  ancient 
realm.  Here  I  see  the  triumph  of  personal  merit,  but; 
still  more  the  consummation  of  a  new  epoch. 

Yes,  Sir !  say  what  you  will,  this  is  the  day  of  the  mer- 
chant. As  in  the  early  ages  war  was  the  great  concern 
1  Bosweira  Johnson,  Vol.  V.  pp.  63, 84,  Oct.  18, 1773. 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTEATBD  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GEANVILLE  SHARP.   487 

of  society,  and  the  very  pivot  of  power,  so  is  trade  now ; 
and  as  feudal  cliiefs  were  the  "  notables,"  placed  at  the 
very  top  of  their  time,  so  are  merchants  now.  All 
things  attest  the  change,  "War,  which  was  once  tlie 
universal  business,  is  now  confined  to  a  few ;  once  a 
daily  terror,  it  is  now  the  accident  of  an  age.  Not  for 
adventures  of  the  sword,  but  for  trade,  do  men  descend 
upon  the  sea  in  ships,  and  traverse  broad  continent  on 
iron  pathways.  Not  for  protection  against  violence,  but 
for  trade,  do  men  come  together  in  cities,  and  rear  the 
marvellous  superstrncture  of  social  order.  If  they  go 
abroad,  or  if  they  stay  at  home,  it  is  trade  that  controls 
them,  without  distinction  of  persons.  In  our  country 
every  man  is  trader:  the  physician  trades  his  benev- 
olent care ;  the  lawyer  trades  his  ingenious  tongue ;  the 
clergyman  trades  his  prayers.  And  trade  summons 
from  the  quarry  choicest  marble  and  granite  to  build  its 
capacious  homes,  and  now,  in  our  own  city,  displays 
warehouses  which  outdo  the  baronial  castle,  and  sales- 
rooms which  outdo  the  ducal  palace.  With  these,  mag- 
niiicent  appliances,  the  relations  of  dependence  and 
protection,  marldng  the  early  feudalism,  are  reproduced 
in  the  more  comprehensive  feudalism  of  trade.  There 
are  European  bankere  who  vie  in  power  with  the  dukes 
and  princes  of  other  days,  and  there  are  traffickers 
everywhere  whose  title  comes  from  the  ledger  and  not 
the  sword,  fit  successors  to  counts,  barona,  and  knights. 
As  the  feudal  chief  allocated  to  himself  and  his  follow- 
ers that  soil  which  was  the  prize  of  his  strong  arm,  so 
now  the  merchant,  with  grasp  more  subtle  and  reaching, 
allocates  to  himself  and  his  followers,  ranging  through 
multitiidinous  degrees  of  dependence,  all  the  spoils  of 
every  land,  triumphantly  won  by  trade.     I  would  not 


■cibyGoogIc 


488        POSITION  AND'  DHTIES.  OF  THE  MEECHANT, 

press  this  parallel  too  far ;  but  at  this  moment,  especial  - 
ly  in  our  coimtiy,  the  merchant,  more  than  any  other 
character,  stands-  in  the  veiy  boots'  of  the  feudal  chief. 
Of  all  pursuits  or  relations,  his  is  now  the  most  exten- 
sive and  formidable,  making  all  others  its  tributaries, 
and  bending  at  times  even  the  lawyer  and  the  clergyman 
to  be  its  dependent  stipendiaries.- 

Such,  in.  our  social  system,  is  the  merchant ;  and  on 
this  precise  and  incontrovertible  statement  I  found  his 
duties.  Wealth,  power,  and  influence  are  not  for  self- 
indu^ence  merely,  and  just  aceoi'ding  to  their  extent 
are  the  oblations  to  others  which  they  impose.  If,  by 
the  rule  of  increase,  to  him  that  hath  is  given,  so  in  the 
same  degree  new  duties  are  superadded :  nor  can  any 
man  escape  from  their  behests.  If  the  merchant  be  in 
reabty  our  feudal  lord,  he  must  render  feudal  service ; 
if  he  be  our  modern  knight,  he  must  do  kn^htly  deeds ; 
if  he  be  tlie  baron  of  our  day,  let  him  maintain  baronial 
chanty  to  the  humble, — ay.  Sir,  and  baronial  co\ir^e 
against  tyrannical  wroi^,  whatsoever  form  it  may  as- 
sume Even  if  I  err  in  alttributii^  to  him  this  peculiar 
position,  I  do  not  err  in  attributing  to  him  these  duties ; 
for  his  influence  is  surely  great,  and  he  is  at  least  a  man, 
bound  by  simple  manhood  to  regard  nothing  human  as 
foreign  to  his  heart. 

The  special  perils  which  aroused  the  age  of  chivalry 
have  passed  away.  Monsters,  in  the  form  of  dragons, 
griffins,  or  unicorns,  no  lor^er  ravf^e  the  land.  Giants 
have  disappeared  from  the  scene.  Kobbers  have  been 
disloi^ed  from  castle  and  forest.  Godeschal  the  Iron- 
hearted,  and  Eobin  Hood,  are  each  without  descendants. 
In  the  new  forms  which  society  assumes,  touched  by  the 
potent  wand  of  trade,  there  is  no  place  for  any  of  these. 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GBANTILLE  SHAHP.   489 

But  wrong  and  outr^e  are  not  yet  extinct  Cast  out 
of  one  body,  they  enter  straightway  another,  whence, 
too,  they  must  be  cast  out.  Alasl  in  our  day,  amidst  all 
this  teeming  civilization,  with  the  horn  of  Abundance 
at  our  gates,  with  the  purse  of  Fortunatus  iu  our  hands, 
with  professions  of  Christianity  on  our  lips,  and  with 
the  merchant  installed  in  the  high  places  of  Chivalry, 
there  are  sorrows  not  less  poignant  than  those  which 
once  enkin(Ued  knightly  sympathy,  and  there  is  wrong 
which  vies  in  loathsomeness  with  early  monsters,  in 
power  with  early  giants,  and  in  existing  immunity  with 
robbers  once  sheltered  by  castle  and  forest,  —  ataUdng 
through  your  streets  in  the  abused  garb  of  Law  itself,  and 
by  its  hateful  presence  dwarfing  all  the  atrocities,  of 
another  age.  A  wicked  man  is  a  deplomble  siglifc ;  but 
a  wicked  law  is  worse  than  any  wicked  man,  even  than 
the  wretch  who  steals  human  beings  from  their  home 
in  Africa ;  nor  can  its  outrt^e  be  redressed  by  any  in- 
cidental charities,  perishing  at  night  as  manna  in  the 
wilderness.  Like  the  monster,  it  must  be  overpowered ; 
like  the  robber,  it  must  be  chained ;  hke  the  wild  beast, 
it  must  be  exterminated. 

To  the  merchant,  then,  especially  to  the  young  mer- 
chant, I  appeal,  by  the  position  you  have  won  and  by 
the  power  wliich  is  yours,  —  go  forth  to  redress  these 
grievances,  whatever  they  may  be,  whether  in  the  suffer- 
ings of  the  solitary  soul  or  audaciously  organized  in  the 
likeness  of  law.  That  I  may  not  seem  to  hold  up  any 
impracticable  standaixi,  that  the  path  of  duty  may  not 
appear  dif&cult,  and  that  no  young  man  need  hesitate, 
even  though  he  find  himself  alone  and  opposed  by  num- 
bers, let  me  present  briefly,  as  becomes  the  hour,  the  ex- 
ample and  special  achievement,  of  Grantili,e  Shaep,  tlie 


■cibyGoogIc 


490         POSITION  AND  DUTIES  OF  THE  MEECHANT, 

humble  Englishman,  who,  without  wealth,  fame,  or  pow- 
er, did  not  hesitate  to  set  himself  against  the  merchants 
of  the  time,  against  the  traditions  of  the  English  bar, 
against  the  authority  of  learned  lawyers,  and  against 
the  power  of  m^istrates,  until,  by  persevering  effort, 
he  compelled  the  highest  tribunal  of  the  land  to  declare 
the  grand  constitutional  truth,  that  the  slave  who  sets 
his  foot  on  British  ground  becomes  that  instant  free. 
His  character  of  pure  and  courageous  principle  may  be 
little  regarded  yet;  but  as  time  advances,  it  will  become 
a  guiding  luminary.  There  are  stars  aloft,  centres  of 
other  systems,  in  such  depths  of  firmament  that  only 
after  the  lapse  of  ages  does  their  light  reach  this  small 
ball  which  we  call  eartL 

Be  assured,  Mr.  President,  I  shall  not  troad  on  for- 
bidden gi-ound  To  the  occasion  and  to  your  Association 
I  shall  be  loyal;  but  let  mo  be  loyal  also  to  myself. 
Thank  God,  the  great  volume  of  the  Past  is  always 
open,  with  its  lessons  of  warning  and  example.  Nor 
will  the  assembly  which  now  doea  me  the  honor  to  listen 
to  me  be  disposed  to  imitate  the  pious  pirates  of  the  Ca- 
ribbean Sea,  who  daily  recited  the  Ten  Commandments, 
always  omittii^  the  injunction,  "  Thou  shalt  not  steal" 
I  know  weU  the  sensitiveness  of  certain  consciences. 
This  is  natural.  It  is  according  to  the  decrees  of  Prov- 
idence, that  whosoever  has  been  engaged  in  meanness 
or  wickedness  should  he  pursued,  wherever  be  moves, 
by  reprovii^  voices,  speaking  to  him  from  the  solitudes 
of  Nature,  from  the  darkness  of  night,  from  the  hum  of 
the  street,  and  from  every  book  that  he  reads,  like  fiery 
toi^ues  at  Pentecost,  until  at  last  the  confession  of  Satan 
himself  can  alone  express  his  wretchedness :  — 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTRATED  BT  THE  LIFE  OF  GKANVILLB  SHARP.    491 

Granviixs  Sharp  was  bom  at  Durham,  in  1735. 
His  family  was  of  great  respectability  and  of  ancient 
lineage.  His  grandfather  was  Archbishop  of  York, 
confidential  chaplain  and  counsellor  of  the  renowned 
Chancellor,  Heneage  Finch,  Lord  Nottingham.  Hia  less 
conspic\iou3  father  was  archdeacon  and  prebendary  of 
the  Church,  who,  out  of  his  ecclesiastical  emoluments, 
knew  how  to  dispense  charity,  while  rearing  his  nu- 
merous children  to  different  pursuits.  Of  these,  Gran- 
ville was  the  youngest  son,  and,  though  elder  brothers 
were  educated  for  professional  life,  he  was  destined  to 
trade,  a  portion  being  set  apart  by  his  father  to  serve 
as  his  apprentice-fee  in  London.  With  this  view  his 
back  was  turned  upon  the  learned  languages,  and  his 
instruction  was  confined  chiefly  to  writing  and  arithme- 
tic ;  but  at  tliia  time  he  read  and  enjoyed  all  the  plays 
of  Shakespeare,  perched  in  an  apple-tree  of  his  father's 
orchard.  "When  fifteen  years  old,  he  was  bound  as  ap- 
prentice to  a  Quaker  linen-draper  in  London,  and  at  this 
tender  age  left  hia  father's  house.  Of  his  apprenticeship 
he  has  given  an  interesting  glimpse. 

"  After  I  had  served  about  three  years  of  my  apprentice- 
Bhip,  my  master,  the  Quaker,  died,  and  1  was  turned  over  to 
a  Presbyterian,  or  rather,  as  he  was  more  properly  called, 
an  Independent  I  afterwaid  lived  some  time  with  an  Irish 
Papist,  and  also  with  another  person,  who,  I  believe,  iiad  no 
religion  at  all."' 

Although  always  a  devoted  member  of  the  Church  of 
England,  these  extraordinary  experiences  in  early  life 
placed  him  above  the  prejudice  of  sect,  and  inspired  a 
rule  of  conduct  worthy  of  perpetual  memory,  which  he 
presents  as  follows, 

1  Memoirs,  by  Prince  Honre,  (London,  1820,)  p.  SB. 


■cibyGoogIc 


492         POSITION  AND  DUTIES  OF  THE  MEECIIAKT, 

"  It  has  tT  g!  t  ne  to  make  a  pr  pe  d  at  uo  ti  I  we  a 
the  OP  H  ONS  of  c  ml  the  r  eb.  us  The  fo  n  er  I  c  a 
freely  con  ]em  w  tho  t  p  eHum  a^  t.  j  dge  the  d  v  luaJ^ 
themsel  es.  Thus  freedom  ot  aig  n  e  t  s  p  ©bene]  as 
well  as  Chnst  in  char  ty  leavin^  pe  sunal  j  dgment  t  H  m 
to  whom  alone  t  belong 

Only  two  >  ca  3  btfore  the  eniolment  of  Granville 
Sharp  inong  Lonlon  ipirent  es  —that  ch  '^  so  la 
mous  Q  1  cil  I  to  y  —  anotl  ei  pers  i  k  1  td  m 
henevolence  and  i  w  m  fane  Ho  a  d  the  jl  lantl  o 
piat,  on  whose  career  Burke  has  east  the  illumination  of 
his  genius,  finished  service  in  the  same  place,  as  appren- 
tice to  a  wholesale  grocer.  I  do  not  know^  tlmt  these 
two  congenial  natures  — or  yet  another  contemporary 
of  lowly  fortunes,  Koberb  Eaikes,  the  inventor  of  Sunday 
schools  —  ever  encountered  in  the  world.  But  they  are 
joined  in  example,— and  the  life  of  an  apprentice,  in  all 
its  humilities,  seems  radiant  with  their  presence,  as  with 
heavenly  light.  Perhaps  among  the  apprentices  of  Bos- 
ton there  may  be  yet  a  Granville  Sharp  or  John  How- 
ard. And  just  in  proportion  as  the  moral  nature  asserts 
its  r^htful  supremacy  here  will  such  a  character  be 
hailed  of  higher  worth  than  the  products  of  all  the  mills 
of  Lowell,  backed  by  all  the  dividends  and  discounts  of 
State  Street. 

Shortly  after  the  completion  of  his  apprenticeship 
and  entrance  upon  business,  Sharp  lost  both  his  par- 
ents, and  very  soon  thereafter,  abandoning  trade,  ob- 
tained a  subordinate  appointment  as  supernumerary 
clerk  in  the  Ordnance  Office,  where,  after  six  years' 
service,  he  became  simply  "  clerk  in  ordinary."  Mean- 
while, conscientiously  fulfilling  this  life  of  routine  and 

1  Memnira,  p.  29. 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTEA.TED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GRANVILLE  SHAHP.    493 

labor^  not  unlike  the  toils  of  Charles  Lamb  at  the  India 
House,  he  pursued,  in  moments  saved  from  business 
and  snatched  from  sleep,  a  series  of  studies,  which, 
though  undervalued  by  his  modesty,  the  scholar  may 
envy.  That  he  might  better  enjoy  and  vindicate  that 
Book  which  he  reverently  accepted  as  the  rule  of  life, 
he  first  studied  Greek  and  then  Hebrew,  obtaining 
siich  command  of  both  languages  as  to  employ  them 
skilfully  in  the  field  of  theological  controversy.  Music 
and  French  he  studied  also,  and  our  own  English  tongue 
too,  on  the  pronunciation  of  which  he  wrote  an  escel- 
lent  essay. 

These  quiet  pursuits  were  intexrupted  by  an  incident 
which  belongs  to  the  romance  of  truth.  An  unhappy 
African,  by  the  name  of  Jonathan  Strong,  was  brought 
as  a  slave  from  Barbadoes  to  London,  where,  after  brutal 
outrage,  at  which  the  soil!  shudders,  inflicted  by  the 
person  who  called  himself  master,  —  I  regret  to  add 
lawyer  also,  —  he  was  turned  adrift  on  the  UBpitying 
stones  of  the  great  metropolis,  lame,  blind,  and  faint, 
with  ague  and  fever,  and  without  a  home.  In  this 
plight,  while  sta^ering  along  in  quest  of  medical  care, 
he  was  met  by  the  Good  Samaritan,  Granville  Sharp, 
who,  touched  by  his  misfortunes,  bound  up  his  wounds, 
gave  him  charitable  assistance,  placed  him  in  a  hospital, 
and  watched  him  through  a  protracted  illness,  until  at 
last  health  and  strength  returned,  and  he  was  able  to 
commence  service  as  freeman  in  a  respectable  home. 
In  this  condition,  after  the  lapse  of  two  years,  he  was 
recognized  in  the  street  by  his  old  master,  who  at  once 
determined  to  entrap  him,  and  to  hold  him  as  slave. 
By  deceitful  message  the  victim  was  tempted  to  a  pub- 
lie  house,  where  he  was  shocked  to  encounter  his  cruel 


■cibyGoogIc 


494        POSITION  AND   DUTIES   OF  THE  MERCHANT, 

claimant,  who,  without  delay,  seized  aiid  committed  him 
to  prison.  Here  again  was  the  Good  Samaritan,  Gran- 
ville Shaxp,  who  lost  no  time  in  enjoining  upon  the 
keeper  of  the  prison,  at  his  peril,  not  to  deliver  the  Af- 
rican to  any  peraon  whatever,  and  then  promptly  in- 
voked the  intervention  of  the  Mayor  of  London.  At 
the  hearii^  hefore  this  magistrate,  it  appeared  that  the 
claimant  had  already  undertaken,  by  formal  bill  of  sale, 
to  convey  the  alleged  slave  to  another  person,  who,  by 
an  agent,  was  in  attendance  to  take  him  on  hoard  a  ship 
bound  for  Jamaica.  As  soon  as  the  case  was  stated, 
the  Mayor  gave  judgment  in  words  worthy  of  imitation. 
"  The  kd,"  said  this  righteous  jui^e,  "  lias  not  stolen 
anything,  and  is  not  guilty  of  any  offence,  and  is  there- 
fore at  hberty  to  go  away."  The  agent  of  the  claim- 
ant, not  disheartened,  seized  Mm  by  the  arm,  and  still 
claimed  him  as  "  property,"  —  yes,  even  as  property ! 
Sharp,  in  ignorance  of  legal  proceedings,  was  for  a  mo- 
ment perplexed,  when  the  friendly  voice  of  the  coroner, 
who  chanced  to  be  near,  whispered,  "  Chaige  him  " ;  on 
which  hint,  our  philanthropist,  turning  at  once  to  the- 
hrazen-fa«ed  claimant,  said,  with  justifiable  anger  of 
manner,  "  Sir,  I  charge  you,  in  the  name  of  the  King, 
with  an  assault  upon  the  person  of  Jonathan  Strong, 
and  all  these  are  my  witnesses," — when,  to  avoid  imme- 
diate commitment,  and  the  yawning  cell  of  the  jail,  he 
let  go  his  piratical,  slave-hunting  grasp,  "  and  all  bowed 
to  the  Lord  Mayor  and  came  away,  Jonathan  following 
Granville  Sharp,  and  no  one  daring  to  touch  him."  ^ 

But  the  end  was  not  yet.     By  this  accidental  and 
disinterested  act  of  humanity  Sharp  was  exposed  at  the 

's  History  of  the  Abolition  of  the  Afrl- 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GRANVILLE  SHARP.   495 

same  time  to  personal  insult  and  to  a  suit  at  law.  The 
disconifited  claimant  —  the  same  lawyer  who  had  origi- 
nally abandoned  the  slave  in  the  streets  of  London' — 
called  on  him  "  to  demand  gentlemanlike  satisfaction  " ; 
to  which  the  pliilanthropist  replied,  that,  as  "he  had 
studied  the  law  so  many  years,  he  should  want  no 
satisfaction  that  the  law  could  give  him."  And  he 
nobly  redeemed  his  word ;  for  he  applied  himself  at 
once  to  his  defence  against  the  legal  process  instituted 
by  the  claimant  for  an  alleged  abstraction  of  property. 
Here  begins  his  greatness. 

It  is  in  collision  with  difiiculty  that  the  sparks  of 
geniune  character  appear.  This  simple-hearted  man, 
now  vindictively  pursued,  laid  his  case  before  an  emi- 
nent solicitor,  who,  aftor  ample  consideration  with  learn- 
ed counsel,  among  whom  was  the  celebrated  Sir  James 
Eyre,  did  not  hesitate  to  assure  him,  that,  under  the 
British  Constitution,  he  could  not  be  defended  against 
the  action.  An  opinion  given  in  1729,  by  the  Attorney- 
General  and  Sohcitor-General  of  the  time,  Yorke  and 
Talbot,  — two  great  names  in  the  English  law,  and  each 
afterwards  Lord  Chancellor,  —  was  adduced,  declaring, 
under  their  respective  signatures,  "  that  a  slave,  by 
coming  from  the  West  Indies  to  Great  Britain  or  Ire- 
land, either  with  or  without  his  master,  doth  not  become 
free,"  and  "  that  the  master  may  legally  compel  him  to 
return  to  the  plantations " ;  and  Lord  Mansfield,  the 
Chief  Justice,  was  reported  as  strenuously  concurring 
in  this  opinion,  to  the  odious  extent  of  deUvering  up 
fugitive  slaves  to  their  claimants.  With  these  author- 
ities against  him,  and  forsaken  by  professional  defend- 
ers. Sharp  was  not  disheartened;  but,  though,  accord- 
ing to  his  own  striking  language,  "totally  unacquainted 


■cibyGoogIc 


496        POSITION  AND   DUTIES   OF  THE  MERCHANT, 

either  with  the  practice  of  the  law  or  the  foundations 
of  it,  having  never  in  his  life  opened  a  law-book  ex- 
cept the  Bible,"  he  was  inspired  to  depend  on  himself. 
An  unconcL«erab!e  will,  and  instincts  often  profounder 
in  their  teaching  than  any  learning,  were  now  his 
coimaeUoi's.  For  nearly  two  years,  during  which  the 
suit  was  still  pending,  he  gave  himself  to  intense  study 
of  the  British  Constitution  in  all  its  bearings  upon 
human  liberty.  During  these  researches  he  was  con- 
firmed in  his  or^nal  prepossessions,  and  aroused  to 
undying  hostility  against  Slavery,  which  he  plainly 
saw  to  be  without  any  sanction  in  the  Constitution, 
"  Tlie  word  slaves,"  he  wrote,  "  or  anything  that  can 
justify  the  enslaving  of  others,  is  not  to  he  found  there, 
God  be  thanked  / "  ^    And  I,  too,  say,  God  be  thanked ! 

The  result  of  these  studies  was  embodied  in  a  tract, 
entitled  "  A  Eepresentation  of  the  Injustice  and  Dan- 
gerous Tendency  of  tolerating  Slavery,  or  of  admitting 
the  least  Claim  of  Private  Property  in  the  Persons  of 
Men  in  England."  This  was  submitted  to  his  counsel, 
one  of  whom  was  the  famous  commentator,  Sir  William 
Blackstone,  and,  by  means  of  copies  in  manuscript,  cir- 
culated among  gentlemen  of  the  bar,  until  the  lawyera 
on  the  other  side  were  actually  intimidated,  and  the 
Slave-Hunter,  failing  to  bring  forward  his  action,  was 
mulcted  in  treble  costs ;  and  thus  ended  that  persecu- 
tion of  our  philanthropist.  In  1769  this  important  tract 
was  printed. 

Thus  far  it  was  an  individual  ease  only  which  en- 
gaged his  care.  Another  soon  followed,  where,  through 
his  chivalrous  humanity,  the  intolerable  wrongs  of  a 
woman  kidnapped  in  London  and  transported  as  slave 
I  Memoirs,  p.  SS. 


;db,Googlc 


ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GEANYILLE  SEA.RP.    497 

to  Barbadoes,  were  redressed,  —  so  far  as  earthly  decree 
could  go.  Learning  the  infinite  woe  of  Slavery,  he  waa 
now  aroused  to  broader  effort.  Shocked  by  an  adver- 
tisement in  a  London  newspaper,  —  such  as  often  ap- 
peared in  those  days,  —  of  "  a  black  girl  to  be  sold,  of  an 
exceRent  temper  and  willing  disposition,"  —  he  at  once 
protested  to  the  Cliancellor,  Lord  Camden,  against  such 
things  as  a  "  notorious  breach  of  the  laws  of  Nature,  hu- 
loanity,  and  equity,  and  also  of  the  established  law,  cus- 
tom, and  Constitution  of  England";'  and  in  the  same 
year.  May  15, 1769,  by  letter  to  the  Archbishop  of  Can- 
terbuiy,  he  solemnly  appealed  against  the  Slave-Trade, 
and  thus  by  many  years  heralded  the  labors  of  Clarkson 
and  Wilberforce.  "I  am  myself  convinced,"  he  said, 
"  that  nothing  can  thrive  which  is  in  any  way  concerned 
in  that  unjust  tmde.  I  have  known  several  instances 
which  are  strong  proofs  to  me  of  the  judgments  of  God, 
even  m  this  world,  against  such  a  destructive  and  in- 
iquitous traffie."  ^  In  these  things  he  showed  not  only 
his  love  of  justice,  but  his  personal  independence.  "  Al- 
though I  am  a  placeman,"  he  wrote  on  another  occasion, 
"  and  indeed  of  a  very  inferior  rank,  yet  I  look  on  my- 
self to  be  perfectly  independent,  because  I  have  never 
yet  been  afraid  to  do  and  avow  whatever  I  thought  just 
and  right,  without  the  consideration  of  consequences  to 
myself :  for,  indeed,  I  think  it  unworthy  of  a  man  to  he 
afraid  of  the  world  ;  and  it  is  a  point  with  me  never 
to  conceal  my  sentiments  on  any  subject  whatever,  not 
even  from  my  superiors  in  office,  when  there  is  a  pivba- 
iilUy  of  answering  any  good  purpose  hy  U."  ^ 

StiU  again  was  his  protecting  presence   enlisted   to 

save  a  fellow-man  from  bondage  ;  and  here  it  is  neces- 

J  Memoirs,  p.  49.  *  Ibid.,  p.  '16.  «  Ibid.,  p.  67. 


■cibyGoogIc 


498  POSITION   AND   DUTIES    OF   THE   MEECilAKT, 

sary  to  note  the  new  fonn  of  outrage.  A  poor  African, 
Thomas  Lewis,  once  a  slave,  was  residing  quietly  at  Chel- 
sea, in  the  neighborhood  of  London,  when  he  was  sudden- 
ly seized  by  his  former  master,  who,  with  the  aid  of  two 
ruffians,  bought  for  the  fiendish  purpose,  dragged  him  on 
his  baclr  into  the  water,  and  thence  into  a  boat  lying  in 
the  Thames,  when,  with  legs  tied,  and  mouth  gagged  by  a 
stick,  he  was  rowed  down  to  a  ship  bound  for  Jamaica, 
under  a  commander  previously' enlisted  in  the  conspir- 
acy, to  be  sold  for  a  slave  on  arrival  in  that  island. 
But  this  diabolical  act,  though  warily  contrived,  did  not 
escape  notice.  The  cries  of  the  victim,  on  his  way  to 
the  boat,  reached  the  servants  of  a  neighboring  mansion, 
who  witnessed  the  deadly  stru^le,  but  did  not  venture 
a  rescue.  Their  mistress,  a  retired  widow,  mother  of 
the  eminent  naturalist  imd  traveller.  Sir  Joseph  Banks, 
on  learning  what  had  passed,  instantly  put  forth  her 
womanly  exertion.  Without  the  hesitation  of  her  sex, 
she  hurried  to  GmnvUle  Sharp,  now  known  for  kn^tly 
zeal  to  succor  the  distressed,  laid  before  liim  the  terrible 
story,  and  insisted  upon  vindicating  the  freedom  of  the 
stranger  at  her  own  expense.  All  honor  to  this  woman ! 
A  simple  warrant,  first  obtained  by  Sharp,  was  scouted 
by  the  captain,  whose  victim,  batlied  in  tears,  was  al- 
ready chained  to  the  mast.  The  great  writ  of  Habeas 
Ccyrpjis  was  next  invoked ;  and  the  ship,  which  had  con- 
tumaciously proceeded  on  its  way,  was  boarded  in  the 
Downs,  happily  witliin  British  jurisdiction,  by  a  faithful 
officer,  who,  in  the  name  of  the  King  of  England,  un- 
bound the  African,  and  took  him  back  to  freedom, 

A  complaint  was  now  presented  against  the  kidnap- 
pers, who  were  at  once  indicted  by  the  grand  jui-y.  The 
cause  was  removed  to  the  Icing's  Bench,  and  on  the 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLTJSTKATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OB"  GEAKVILLE  SHARP.    499 

20th  of  February,  1771,  brought  into  court  before  Lord 
Mansfield.  The  defence  set  up,  that  the  victim  was 
their  slave,  and  therefore  property  to  be  rightfully  seized. 
Here  the  c[ue3tion  was  distinctly  presented,  whetlier 
any  such  property  was  recognized  by  the  British  Con- 
stitution ?  The  transcendent  magistrate  who  presided 
on  the  occasion  saw  the  magnitude  of  the  issue,  and 
soitght  to  avoid  ita  formal  determination  by  presenting 
the  subordinate  point,  whether  the  claimant,  supposing 
such  property  recognized,  was  able  to  prove  the  man  to 
be  his  ?  The  Icidnappera  were  found  guilty ;  but  judg- 
ment ^:ainat  them  was  waived,  on  the  recommendation 
of  Lord  Mansfield,  who,  be  it  observed,  at  every  stage, 
shrank  from  any  act  by  which  Slavery  in  England  should 
be  annulled,  and  on  this  occasion  avowed  his  "  hope  that 
the  question  never  would  be  finally  discussed,"  Sharp 
was  justly  indignant  at  this  craven  conduct,  which,  with 
all  gentleness  of  manner,  but  with  perfect  firmness,  he 
did  not  hesitate  to  arraign  as  open  contempt  of  the  true 
principles  of  the  Constitution.^ 

Alas  !  it  is  the  natinal  influence  of  Slavery  to  make 
men  hard.  Gk)rgon-like,  it  turns  to  stone.  Among  the 
judicial  magistrates  of  the  time.  Lord  IMansfield  was  not 
alone.  His  companion  in  contemporary  fame.  Black- 
stone,  shared  the  petrifaction.  The  first  edition  of  his 
incomparable  Commentaries  openly  declared,  that  a 
slave,  on  coming  to  England,  liecame  at  once  a  free- 
man; but,  in  a  subsequent  edition,  after  the  question 
had  been  practically  presented  by  Granville  Sharp,  the 
text  was  pusillaniraously  altered  to  an  abandonment 
of  this  great  constitutional  principle ;  and  our  intrepid 
plulanthropist  hur^  his  head  with  shame  and  anxiety, 
1  Memoirfl,  pp.  B3-61. 


;db,Googlc 


500         POSITION  AND  DUTIES  OF  THE  MEBCHANT, 

■while  the  counsel  for  the  Slave-Hunfccrs  triumphantly- 
invoked  this  tei^versation  as  new  authority  against 
Freedom.^ 

The  day  -was  at  hand  when  the  great  philanthropist 
was  to  be  vindicated,  even  by  the  Hps  of  the  great  magis- 
trate. The  Slavery  question  could  not  he  suppressed : 
the  Chief  Justice  of  England  could  not  suppress  it. 
Drive  out  Nature  with  a  pit-chfork,  and  still  she  will  re- 
turn. Only  a  few  months  elapsed,  when  a  memorable 
case  arose,  which  presented  the  question  distinctly  for 
judgment.  A  negro,  James  Somerset,  whose  name,  in 
the  establishment  of  an  immortal  principle,  will  help  to 
keep  alive  the  appellation  of  the  ducal  house  to  which  it 
originally  belonged,  —  was  detained  in  irons  on  hoard  a 
ship  lyir^  in  the  Thames,  and  bound  for  Jamaica.  On 
application  to  Lord  Mansfield  in  his  behalf,  supported 
by  affidavits,  December  3,  1771,  a  writ  of  Hahem  Cor- 
piis  was  directed  to  the  captain  of  the  ship,  command- 
ing him  to  return  the  body  of  Somerset  into  court,  with 
the  cause  of  his  detention.  In  course  of  time,  though 
somewhat  tardily,  the  body  was  produced,  and  for  cause 
of  detention  it  was  ass^ed,  that  he  was  the  property  of 

'  Memoirs,  pp.  91,  92,  note.  The  text  of  tha  first  edition  (ITflBI,  ns  quot- 
ed hy  Sharp's  biographer,  Hoare,  was  as  follows;  "And  this  spirit  of  liberty 
is  BO  deeply  implanted  in  oar  Constitution,  and  rooted  even  in  our  very  soil, 
that  a  Slave,  or  a.  Negro,  the  moment  he  lands  in  England,  falls  under  the 
protection  of  the  laws,  and,  with  regard  to  all  national  rights,  becomes  eo 
imtanti  a  freeman."  As  altered,  the  Iiittec  pait  was  found  to  read  thus: 
" ....  a  negra,  the  moment  he  lands  in  England,  falls  under  the  prote<>- 
tion  of  the  laws,  and  so  far  becomes  n  freeman ;  though  the  master's  light 
to  his  service  may  poteHls  BtJH  contmne."  Hoare  remarks,  that  he  finds 
this  reading  in  the  fifth  edition,  1TT3.  It  appears  also  in  an  edition  printed 
at  Philadelphia  eo  early  as  1771.  And  thus  the  text  was  finally  left  by  the 
author,  and  eo  remains.  Ill  the  third  edition,  printed  at  Oxford  in  1768,  for 
"poi^blp  ■'  in  the  last  elnune  we  have  the  word  "  probably."  Of  this  prior 
reading  Hoare  makes  no  mention. 


;db,Googlc 


ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GKAKVILLE  SHARP.    501 

Cliailea  Stewart,  Esq.,  of  Virginia,  who  had  held  Mm 
in  Virginia  as  a  slave,  —  that,  when  broi^ht  as  such  to 
London,  he  ran  away  from  the  service  of  his  master, 
hut  was  recovered,  and  finally  dehvered  on  hoard  the 
ship  to  he  carried  to  Jamaica,  there  to  he  sold  as  the 
slave  and  property  of  the  Virginia,  g&nth'nian}  As  no 
facta  were  in  issue  here,  the  whole  cause  hinged  on  the 
Constitutionality  of  Slavery  in  Ei^land ;  and  the  great 
cLuestion  which  the  Chief  Justice  had  sought  to  avoid, 
and  on  which  the  Commentator  had  changed  sides,  was 
once  again  to  he  heard. 

Tliat  the  proceedings  might  have  a  solemnity  in  some 
degree  corresponding  to  their  importance,  the  cause  was 
brought  by  Lord  Mansfield  before  the  King's  Bench, 
where  it  was  continued  from  time  to  time,  accoi-ding 
to  the  convenience  of  counsel  and  the  coitrt,  running 
through  months,  and  occupying  different  days  in  Jan- 
uary, February,  and  May,  down  to  the  22d  June,  1772, 
when  judgment  was  finally  delivered.  During  all  this 
period,  Somerset,  having  recognized  with  sureties  for 
bis  appearance  in  court,  was  left  at  large.  To  Granville 
Sharp  he  had  repaired  at  once,  and  by  him  was  kindly 
welcomed  and  effectually  aided.  Under  the  advice  of 
this  humble  clerk,  counsel  learned  in  the  law  were  re- 
tained, who  were  instructed  by  him  in  the  grounds  of  de- 
fence.    At  his  expense,  too,  out  of  his  small  means,  the 


1  Since  this  Address,  privste  papers  have  seen  the  light,  by  which  it  ap- 
pears, that  the  clainlaiit  was  cashier  and  paymaster  of  customs  in  North 
America,  and  for  some  years  previous  to  this  important  case  remfed  in  ■ 
Boom,  where  Somerset  was  Itnown.  Tiirough  all  the  argnmenta  he  is 
spoken  of  as  from  Virginia,  and  reference  is  constantly  made  to  the  laws  of 
Virginia;  nor  is  this  mistake  astonishing,  when  it  is  understood  that  an  ora- 
tor in  Parliament  once  spoke  of  the  "  Island  of  VirRinia,"  and  nobody  cor- 
rected him.  —  Mass.  Hist.  Soc.  Proceedhigs  for  1663-64,  p.  SSI  i  Wlenage, 
by  Emory  Washburn. 


;db,Googlc 


502         POSITION  ASD  DUTIES   OF  THE  MEECHAXT, 

proceedings  were  maintained,  "  Aloney,"  he  nobly  said, 
"  has  no  value  but  when  it  is  well  spent ;  and  I  am 
thoroughly  convinced  that  no  part  of  my  little  pittance 
of  ready  money  can  ever  be  better  bestowed  than  in  an 
honest  endeavor  to  crush  a  growing  oppression,  which 
is  not  only  shocking  to  humanity,  but  in  time  must 
prove  even  dangerous  to  the  commimity."  ^  On  the 
other  side  the  costs  were  defrayed  by  a  subscription 
among  the  merchants.  Hear  this,  merchants  of  Boston, 
justly  jealous  of  the  good  name  of  yoiu'  calling,  and  hang 
your  heads  with  shame  I 

To  the  glory  of  the  Ei^lish  bar,  the  eminent  counsel 
for  the  slave  declined  all  fee  for  their  valuable  and  pro- 
traicted  services ;  and  here  let  me  pause  for  one  moment 
to  pay  them  an  unaffected  tribute.  They  were  five  in 
number :  Mr.  Serjeant  Davy,  who  opened  the  cause  with 
the  proposition,  "  that  no  man  at  this  day  is  or  can  he  a 
slave  in  England," —  Mr.  Serjeant  Glynn,  —  Mr.  Mans- 
field, afterward  Chief  Justice  of  the  Common  Pleas, — 
Mr.  Hai^Bve,  and  Mr.  AUeyne,  —  each  of  whom  was 
patiently  heard  by  the  Court  at  length.  The  aigumenfc 
of  Mr.  Haigrave,  who  early  volunteered  his  great  learn- 
ing in  the  case,  is  one  of  tlie  masterpieces  of  the  bar. 
This  was  his  first  appearance  in  court ;  but  it  is  well 
that  Liberty  on  that  day  had  such  support.  For  all 
these  gallant  lawyers,  champions  of  the  Eight,  there  is 
honor  ever  increasing,  which  the  soul  spontaneously  of- 
fers, while  it  timis  in  sorrow  from  the  counsel,  only  two 
in  number,  who  allowed  themselves  to  be  enlisted  on  the 
side  of  Slavery.  I  know  well  that  in  Westminster  Hall 
there  are  professional  usages  —  which  happily  do  not 
prevail  in  our  country,  where  every  such  service  depends 
1  Memoirs,  p.  87- 


;db,Googlc 


ILLUSTEATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GEANVILLE  SHARP.   503 

purely  on  contract — by  which  a  barrister  thinks  himself 
constrsiued  to  assume  any  cause  properly  presented  to 
him.  If  this  service  depended  on  contract  there,  as 
with  U3,  the  sarcasm  of  Ben  Jonson  would  he  strictly 


But  I  undertake  to  affirm  that  no  us^e,  professional  or 
social,  can  give  any  apology  for  joining  the  pack  of  the 
Slave-Hunter.  Mr.  Dunning,  one  of  the  persons  in  this 
predicament,  showed  that  he  acted  against  his  better 
nature.^  The  first  words  in  h^  argument  were :  "  It  is 
incumbent  on  me  to  justify  the  detainer  of  the  n^;ro." 
Pray,  why  incumbent  on  him  ?  He  was  then  careful  to 
show  that  he  did  not  maintain  any  absolute  property  in 
him ;  and  he  proceeded  to  say,  among  other  thii^'S,  that 
it  was  his  misfortune  to  address  an  audience,  the  greater 
part  of  which,  he  ffcared,  was  prejudiced  the  other  way, 
—  that,  for  himself,  he  would  not  be  understood  to  inti- 
mate a  wish  in  favor  of  Slavery,  but  that  he  was  bound  , 
in  duty  to  maintain  those  arguments  most  useful  to  the 
claimant,  so  far  as  consistent  with  the  truth ;  and  he 
concluded  with  this  conscience-stricken  appeal :  "  I  hope, 
therefore,  I  shall  not  suffer  in  the  opinion  of  tliose  whose 
honest  passions  are  fired  at   the   name   of  Slavery ;  I 

1  The  Fox,  Act  IV.  so.  a. 

*  A  privats  letter  from  the  daimant  to  Jamas  Murray,  Esq.,  of  Boston, 
dated  London,  -Inne  IB,  1T72,  cstriea  us  Ixick  to  Iba  times,  and  even  to  the 
oourb-room.  "1  aia  told,"  -writes  tliB  claimant,  "that  some  young  conn- 
Be!  flourished  away  on  the  side  of  libertj-,  nnd  acquired  great  honor.  Dun- 
ning was  dull  and  languid,  and  would  have  made  a  much  better  flgiire  on 
that  side  alfo."    Of  course  ha  would.    After  speakinir  of  the  "  load  of  abuse 

thrown  on  L— d  M ,  for  hesitating  to  pronounce  judgment  in  favor  pf 

freedom,"  the  claimant  says,  "  Dunning  has  coma  in  also  for  a  pretty  good 
share  for  taking  tha  wrong  side."  (Masa.  HistSoc.  Frooeedingsforises- 
84,  pp.  333,  834.)    Abolitionists  had  begun  to  be  critical. 


■cibyGoogIc 


504         POSITION  AND   DUTIES  OF  THE  MERCHANT, 

hope  I  have  not  transgressed  my  duty  to  Humanity."  ^ 
Clearly  the  lawyer  had  transgressed  his  duty  to  Human- 
ity. No  man.  can  rightfully  enforce  a  principle  which 
violates  human  nature  ;  nor  can  any  subtQty  of  dialec- 
tics, any  extent  of  erudition,  or  any  grandeur  of  intel- 
lect sustain  him.  Notwithstanding  the  character  for 
liberal  principles  which  John  Dunning  acquired,  and 
which  breathes  in  his  sensitive  excuses,  -—  notwithstand- 
ing his  double  fame  at  once  in  Westminster  Hall  and 
Saint  Stephen's  Chapel, —  notwithstanding  the  peerage 
which  he  won, — this  odious  service  rendered  to  a  Slave- 
Hunter,  calling  himself  a  Virginia  gentleman,  cries  in 
judgment  against  him,  and  wU!  continue  to  cry,  as  time 
advances.  (Do  not  start,  Mr.  President, — I  am  nar- 
rating occurrences  in  another  hemisphere  and  another 
century.)  As  well  undertake  a  Slave-Hunt  in  the 
deserts  of  Africa  as  in  the  streets  of  London.  As  well 
pm'sue  the  fugitive  with  tlie  hired  whip  of  the  overseer 
as  with  the  hii-ed  argument  of  the  lawyer.  As  well 
chase  him  with  the  baying  of  the  blood-hound  as  with 
the  tongue  of  the  advocate.  It  is  the  lawyer's  clear 
duty  to  uphold  Imman  rights,  whether  m  the  loftiest  or 
the  lowhest;  and  when  he  undertakes  to  uphold  a 
wrong  outrageous  as  Slavery,  his  proper  function  is  so 
far  reversed  that  he  can  be  aptly  described  only  in  the 
phrase  of  the  Eoman  Church,  Athocatus  Diaholi,  the 
DevQ's  Advocate. 

Passing  from  counsel  to  court,  we  find  occasion  for 
gratitude  and  sorrow.  The  three  judges,  Aston,  Willes, 
and  Ashhurst,  who  sat  at  the  aide  of  Loi-d  Mansfield, 
were  silent  through  the  whole  proceedings,  overawed, 
perhaps,  by  his  commanding  authority,  so  that  he  alone 
1  Howell's  state  Trials,  XX.  Tl-Je. 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GRANVILLE  SHARP.   505 

seems  to  be  present.  Of  large  iiitellect,  and  extensive 
studies,  running  into  all  regions  of  learning,  —  with  a 
silver-tongued  voice,  and  an  amenity  of  manner  which 
gave  constant  charm  to  his  presence, — with  unsurpassed 
professional  and  pohfcical  experience  comhined,  —  early 
companion  of  Pope,  and  early  competitor  of  Pitt, — hav- 
ing already  once  refused  the  post  of  Prime  Minister,  and 
three  times  lefused  the  post  of  Chancellor,  —  he  stood 
forth,  at  the  period  when  the  poor  slave  was  brought 
hefore  Irim,  an  acknowledged  master  of  jurisprudence, 
and,  take  him  for  all  in  all,  the  most  finished  magistrate 
England  had  then  produced.  But  his  chai'aeter  liad  one 
fatal  defect,  too  common  on  the  bench.  He  lacked  moral 
firmness, — happily  not  lacking  in  Granville  Sharp,  Still 
more,  he  was  not  natumlly  on  the  side  of  Liberty,  as 
becomes  a  great  judge,  but  always,  by  blood  and  instinct, 
on  the  side  of  prerogative  and  power,  — an  offence  for 
which  he  was  arraigned  by  his  contemporary,  Junius, 
and  for  which  posterity  will  hold  him  to  strict  account. 
But  his  luminous  mind,  pi-ompt  to  perceive  the  force  of 
prmciples,  could  not  resist  the  array  of  ai^ument  now 
marshalled  for  Freedom.  He  saw  clearly  that  a  system 
like  Slavery  could  not  find  home  under  the  British  Con- 
stitut'on,  whwh  nowhere  meniiom  the  name  Slave;  and 
yet  he  shrank  fconi  the  sublime  conclusion.  More  tlian 
once  he  coquetted  \vith  the  merchants,  who  had  the  ca.^e 
so  much  at  heart,  and  twice  ignobly  suggested  that  the 
claimant  might  avoid  the  decision  of  the  great  question, 
fraught  with  Freedom  or  Slavery  to  multitudes,  simply 
by  manumitting  the  individual.  And  when  at  last  the 
case  could  not  be  arrested  by  any  device,  or  be  lon- 
ger postponed,- — when  judgment  was  inevitable, — he 
came  to  the  work,  not  warmly  or  generously,  but  in 

TOi~  III.  32 


■cibyGoogIc 


506         POSITION  AND  DUTIES   OF   THE   MERCHANT, 

trembling  obedience  to  tbe  Truth,  whicli  waited  to  be 
declared. 

On  other  occasions,  of  purely  conimei"eiaI  character, 
his  judgments  are  more  learned  and  elaborate,  besides 
being  reported  with  more  completeness  and  care ;  but 
no  judgment  of  equal  s^iiicance  ever  fell  from  the 
great  Oracle.  Prom  various  sources  I  have  sought  its 
precise  import*  It  is  remarkable  for  several  rules, 
which  it  clearly  enunciates,  and  which,  tliongh  often 
assaulted,  atiU  stand  as  reason  and  as  law.  Of  these, 
the  first  is  expressed  in  these  simple  words:  "If  the 
parties  will  have  judgment,  Jiat  justilia,  ruat  ccdwni:  let 
justice  be  done,  whatever  be  the  consequence."  The 
Latin  phrase  which  here  plays  such  a  prominent  part, 
though  of  classical  stamp,  cannot  he  traced  to  any 
classical  origin,  and  it  has  even  been  asserted  that  it 
was  freshly  coined  by  Lord  Mansfield  on  this  occasion, 
worthy  of  such  commanding  truth  in  such  commanding 
phrase.  But  it  is  of  older  date,  and  from  another  mint, 
— though  it  is  not  too  much  to  say,  that  it  took  its  cur- 
rency and  authority  from  him.  Coming  from  such  a 
conservative  magistrate,  it  is  of  peculiar  importance. 
With  little  expansion,  it  says  openly;  To  every  man  his 
natural  rights ;  justice  to  all,  without  distinction  of  per- 
son, without  abrit^ment,  and  without  compromise.    Let 

1  It  is  strange  that  there  shonlil  be  no  single  satlsfnctory  report  of  tills 
memorable  judgment.  That  usually  quoted  from  Hoivell's  State  Trials, 
Vol.  XX.  coll.  SO-Sa,  was  copied  from  Lofft,  a  repoi'ter  generally  aToided 
SB  authority.  There  is  another  report  in  Honre's  Memoirs  of  Sharp,  pp. 
89-91!  also  anofliOT  in  Campbell's  Lives  of  the  Chief  Jnstiees,  Vol.  II.  p. 
119;  and  still  annther,  and  In  some  respects  the  best,  In  the  Appendii:  (No. 
8)  to  a  tract  published  by  Sharp  in  1776,  entitled  "Tlie  Just  Limitation 
of  Slavery  In  the  Laws  of  God,  compared  with  the  Unbounded  Claims  of 
the  African  Traders  and  British  American  Slaveholders."  It  is  conaidered 
and  quoted  in  other  contemporary  tracts. 


;db,Googlc 


ILLUSTKAl'ED  EY  THE  LIFE  OF  GEAHVILLK  SHARP,    507 

justice  be  done,  though  it  drags  down  the  pillars  of  the 
sky.     Thus  spoke  the  Chief  Justice  of  England.^ 

1  A  British  writer,  givinj;  an  aoeount  of  tlie  Somoi'set  case,  says  of  this 
niaKim,  that  "  it  liaa  found  iU  way  into  use  as  a  classical  expression,  and,  as 
no  one  has  been  able  t«  find  it  in  any  Latin  anthor,  it  is  supposed  to  have 
been  of  Lord  Mimsfiold's  own  coining."  (Chambflrs'a  Edinburgh  Journal, 
July  31, 1852,  N,  S.  Vol.  X VIIL  p.  7 1 :  Sbma  tn  Bnlais.)  This  is  a  mistake. 
The  praciBe  phrase  will  be  found  in  Ward's  "  Simple  Cobler  of  Aggawamni 
in  America,"  written  in  1646,  and  iirat  printed  ill  lfl47,  —  "  It  la  lesse  to  say, 
Slatualar  teriUa,  ruat  Segami,  Uiaii  Fiat  Jtaliita,  mat  Cabaa"  (p- 1*);  but 
its  origin,  in  substance,  if  not  in  tonn,  is  earlier.  There  is  little  doubt  that  it 
does  not  occur  in  any  Latin  author.  Its  Latinity  is  good,  and  might  belong 
to  the  classical  period.  The  latter  clause,  raat  cafiun,  has  classical  nulhority, 
as  in  the  passage  of  Terence,  showing  that  it  was  a  common  saying  in  his 
Hme,  "  Quid  si  redeo  ad  illos  jai  aatat,  Qaid  si  nunc  oirfam  rmt  t "  ( Hean- 
ton..  Act.  IV.  so.  3.)  The  idea  is  also  Boraao.  On  the  European  continent, 
and  especially  in  Germany,  the  maxim  has  another  form,  which  Is  ooranion, 
—  Fiat  jiatUia,  pereot  manrfia.  Binder,  in  his  J^Tobh*  Tkeiaanii  Adagiorum 
iatfwwitni,  (Stuttgart,  1861,)  cites  it  in  this  form  as  fiejraii  Jam,  explained 
OS  "  a  designation  for  the  maxims,  taken  from  the  Corpua  Jnrta  and  the  works 
of  the  dlHbrent  ancient  civilians,  which  have  bec<nne  proverbial."  Ill  the 
same  authority  is  the  hexameter  verse,  FialjualUia,  pereal  licet  integer  ortti, 
from  Johamiis  Lelbi  StsdaOica  {Coburg.  1637).  In  England  the  mnsira  was 
current  in  other  forms.  As  early  as  February  28, 1824-B,  in  a  letter  to  the 
English  ambHssiidor  at  Holland,  alluding  t<v  "  the  business  of  Amboyne,"  we 
meat  Finl  jwililia  el  rtoi  mundui.  (Birch's  Court  and  Times  of  James  L, 
Vol.  IL  p.  600.)  In  a  speech  in  the  House  of  Commons,  December  22, 
1640,  against  the  judges  who  pronounced  in  favor  of  ship-money,  an  orator 
says!  "If  ever  any  nadon  might  justifiably,  we  certainly  may  now,  now 
most  properly,  most  Eeasonably,  cry  out,  and  cry  aloud,  Vel  eaora  Tegnet 
jtufilia  vel  raat  cahm."  And  he  concludes  with  a  motion,  "  That  a  spe- 
cial committee  may  be  appointed  to  examine  the  whole  carriage  of  that 
eStOQUdioial  judgment,  ....  and,  upon  report  thereof,  to  draw  op  a 
charge  against  the  guiltyj  and  tbea  Lea  carrai,  Jial  Jailitta.  (Pari.  Hist, 
2d  ed.,  London,  1763,  Vol.  IX.  p.  192.)  In  the  answer  of  the  Duke  of  Eloh- 
mond  {Jaimary  81,  1641-2)  to  the  chai^  of  the  Commons,  it  is  said: 
"  Magna  <i(  veribu  et  presaldiiL  I  wish  it  may  do  so  in  what  concerns 
me.  Begnet  jwiiftt  tt  mat  ciebm."  (Pari.  Hist.,  Vol.  X.  p.  254.  Also, 
HoweU's  State  Trials,  Vol.  IV.  col.  116.)  The  first  clause  of  (he  maxim  ia 
an  old  law  phrase,  found  in  Law  Dictionaries,  and  often  repeated.  A  letter, 
dated  London,  May  *,  1631,  relating  the  tine  and  degradation  of  Lord  Bacon, 
concludes,  FialjuiliHa.  (Birch's  James  I.,  Vol.  II.  p.  253.)  Charles  I.,  in 
a  letter  to  the  Lords,  dated  May  11,  1641,  interceding  for  Stratford,  said: 
"  But  if  no  less  than  his  life  can  satisfv  my  people,  I  must  say.  Fiat  jui- 
UUa."    (Park  Hist.  VoL  IX,  p.  816.    Howell's  State  Triels,  Vol.  IIL  coL 


■cibyGoogIc 


508         POSITION  AND   DUTIES   OF  THE  MEECHANT, 

And  Still  another  rule,  hardly  less  important  or  less 
commanding,  wa3  clearly  proclaimed  in  theae  penetrat- 
ing words :  "  I  care  not  for  the  supposed  dicta  of  judges, 
however  eminent,  if  they  he  cordrary  to  all  principle  " ; 
or,  in  other  language.  In  vain  do  you  invoke  great  names 
in  the  law,  even  the  names  of  Hardwicke  and  Talbot, 
and  my  own  learned  associate,  Blackstone,  in  behalf  of 
an  institution  which  defies  reason  and  outrages  justice. 
Human  precedent  is  powerless  against  immutable  prin- 
ciple.   Thus  again  spoke  the  Chief  Justice  of  England. 

Braced  by  these  rules,  the  next  stages  were  logically 
easy.  And  here  he  uttered  words  which  are  like  a  but- 
tress to  Freedom.  He  declared,  that,  tracing  Slaveiy  to 
natural  principles,  it  can  never  be  supported :  that  is 
to  say,  Slavery  is  a  violation  of  the  great  law  of  Nature, 
established  by  God  hunself,  coextensive  in  space  and 
time  with  the  Universe.  Again  he  proclaimed,  Sla- 
very cannot  stand  on  any  reason,  moral  or  pohtical,  but 
only  by  virtue  of  positive  laiv;  and  he  cHnched  his  con- 
clusion by  the  unquestionable  truth,  that,  in  a  matter 
so  odious,  the  evidence  and  authority  of  this  law  must 
be  taken  strictly :  in  other  words,  a  wrong  like  Slavery, 
which  fmds  no  support  in  natural  law  or  in  reason,  can 
he  maintained,  if  at  all,  only  by  some  dread  mandate, 
from  some  sovereign  authority,  irresistibly  clear  and  in- 
capable of  a  double  sense,  which  declares  in  precise  and 
unequivocal  terms,  that  men  guilty  of  no  crime  may  be 
held  as  slo,ves,  and  be  submitted  to  the  bai^ins  of  the 
market-place,  the  hammer  of  the  auctioneer,  and  the 
hunt  of  the  blood-hound.     Clearly  no   such  mandate 

1B20.)  Tf  notolaBsiealin  ftuthority,  the  miraim  is  not  without  interest  from 
BSsociMion  with  great  events  of  Enfflish  history,  whiie  it  in  a  perpetual  in- 
jnnction  to  jastice.  Shskespeare  gives  exprassion  to  similar  troth,  whan 
he  Bays,  "  Be  just  and  fear  not" 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GKAKVILLE  SHARP.    509 

could  be  shown  in  EugkncL  After  asserting  the  ohvious 
truth,  that  rights  cannot  depend  on  any  discrimination 
of  color,  and  tlma  discarding  the  profane  assumptions  of 
race,  while  he  quoted  aptEoman  authority, — 
"  Quamvis  Ule  nSger,  quamvis  to  oandidus  esses," 
the  Chief  Justice  concluded,  "And  therefore  let  the 
negro  be  discharged,"  Such  was  this  immortal  judg- 
ment. I  catch  its  last  words,  already  resounding  through 
the  ages,  with  the  voice  of  deliverance  to  an  enslaved 
people. 

■  From  Westminster  Hall,  where  he  had  been  held  so 
long  in  painful  suspense,  the  happy  freedman,  with  glad 
tidings  of  deliverance,  hurried  to  his  angel  protector, 
Granville  Sharp,  who,  tliougli  organizing  and  sustaining 
these  proceedings,  was  restrained  by  unobtrusive  mod- 
esty from  all  attendance  in  court,  that  he  might  in  no 
wise  irritate  the  Chief  Justice,  unfortunately  prepos- 
sessed against  his  endeavor.  And  thus  closed  the  most 
remarkable  constitutional  battle  in  English  history, 
fought  by  a  simple  clerk,  once  apprentice  to  a  linen- 
draper,  against  the  merchants  of  London,  backed  by 
great,  names  in  law,  and  by  the  most  exalted  magistrate 
of  the  age.  Like  the  striphng  David,  he  went  forth  to 
the  contest  "with  only  a  sling  and  a  few  smooth  stones 
from  the  brook;  and  Goliath  fell  prostrate.  Not  merely 
the  individual  slave,  but  upwards  of  fourteen  thousand 
human  beings,  —  four  times  as  many  slaves  as  could 
be  counted  throughout  New  England  at  the  adoption  of 
the  National  Constitution,  —  rejoiced  in  emancipation; 
a  slave-hunt  was  made  impossible  in  the  streets  of 
London;  and  a  great  principle  was  set  up  which  will 
stand  forever  as  a  Landmark  of  Freedom. 

This  triumph,  hailed  at  the  time  by   the  friends  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


510  POSinOS    AND    DUTIES    OF   THE   MEECHAST, 

human  happiness  with  exultation  and  delight,  was  com- 
memorated hy  poetry  and  eloquenca    It  prompted  Cow- 
per,  in  his  "  Task,"  to  these  touching  verses :  — 
"  Slaves  cannot  breathe  in  England ;  if  their  Inngs 
Itecelv«  our  air,  tlmt  moment  tiiey  are  frea  •■ 
Tbey  touch  our  country,  and  their  ehacliles  fall. 
That's  noble,  and  bespeaks  a  nation  proud 
And  jealous  of  the  blessing.    Spread  it,  then, 
And  let  it  circulate  through  every  vein 
Of  all  your  Empire,  that,  where  Britain's  power 
la  felt,  mankind  may  feel  her  merey  too." 

It  inspired  Curran  to  a  burst  of  eloquence,  grand,  and 
familiar  to  all  who  hear  me. 

"  I  speak  in  the  spirit  of  the  British  law,  which  makes  Lib- 
erty commensurate  with  and  inseparable  from  British  soil,  — 
which  proclaims  even  to  the  stranger  and  sojourner,  the  mo- 
ment he  sets  his  foot  upon  British  earth,  that  the  ground  on 
which  he  treads  is  holy  and  consecrated  by  the  genius  of 
Universal  Emancipation.  No  matter  in  what  language  his 
doom  may  have  been  pronounced,  —  no  matter  what  com- 
plexion, mcompatible  with  Freedom,  an  Indian  or  an  Afri- 
can sun  may  have  burnt  upon  him,  —  no  matter  in  what 
diBastrous  battle  his  liberty  may  have  been  cloven  down,  — 
no  matter  with  what  solemnities  he  may  have  been  devoted 
upon  the  altar  of  Slavery  ;  the  first  moment  he  touches  the 
sacred  soil  of  Britain,  the  altar  and  the  god  sink  together  in 
the  dust,  his  soul  walks  abroad  in  her  own  majesty,  his  body 
swells  beyond  the  measure  of  his  chains  that  burst  from 
around  him,  and  he  stands  redeemed,  r^enerated,  and  dis- 
enthralled by  the  irresistible  genius  of  Universal  Emancipa- 

It  was  this  triumph  which  lifted  Brougham,  in  our 
own  day,  to  one  of  those  vivid  utterances  hy  which 
truth  is  iiashed  upon  unwilling  sottls, 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GEANVILLE  SHARP.   511 

"  Tell  me  not  of  rights,  —  talk  not  of  the  property  of  the 
planter  in  his  slaves.  I  deny  the  right, — 1  a,cknowledge  not 
the  property.  The  prinoiplea,  the  feelings  of  our  common 
nature  rise  in  rebelhon  E^ainst  it.  Be  the  appesi  made  to 
the  understanding  or  to  the  heart,  the  sentence  is  the  same 
that  rejects  it.  In  vain  you  tell  me  of  la.ws  that  sanction 
such  a  claim.  There  is  a  law  above  all  the  enactraenta  of 
human  codes,  —  the  same  throiighout  the  world,  the  same  in 
all  times :  .  .  .  .  it  is  the  law  written  on  the  heart  of  man 
by  the  finger  of  his  Maker ;  and  by  that  law,  unchai^eable 
and  eternal,  while  men  despise  fraud  and  loathe  rapine  and 
abhor  blood,  they  will  reject  with  indignation  the  wild  and 
guilty  fantasy  that  man  can  hold  property  in  man."  '■ 

Graiiville  Sharp  did  not  test  from  labor.  The  Hu- 
manities are  not  solitary.  Where  one  is  found,  there 
win  other.?  be  also.  The  advocate  of  the  slave  in  Lon- 
don was  natinally  the  advocate  of  liberty  for  all  every- 
where. In  this  spirit  he  signalized  himself  against  that 
I  of  the  English  law,  the  hateful  system  of  Im- 
,,  while  he  encountered  no  less  a  person  than 
Dr.  Johnson,  whom  lie  did  not  hesitate  to  charge  with 
"plausible  sophistry  and  important  self-sufficiency,  as 
if  he  supposed  that  the  mere  sound  of  words  was  capa- 
ble of  altering  the  nature  of  things  " ;  ^  also,  against  the 
claims  of  Ei^land  in  the  controversy  with  her  American 
colonies,  zealously  maintaining  our  cause  in  a  publica- 
tion, of  which  it  is  said  seven  thousand  copies  were 
printed  in  Boston^;  also,  in  establisliing  a  colony  of 
liberated  slaves  at  Sierra  Leone,  on  the  coast  of  Africa, 
predecessor  of  our  more  successful  Liberia ;  and,  finally, 

1  Speech  on  Nei^ro  Sltivery,  July  13, 1830;  Works,  Vol.  X.  p.  216. 
a  Memoir,  p.  169. 

s  A  Declamtioii  of  the  People's  Nntural  Right  to  n  Shnra  in  the  Legisla- 
ture (London,  1774).    Mamoirs,  pp.  173, 173. 


■cibyGoogIc 


512  POSITION"  AND    DUTIES    OF    THE    MEHCIIAST, 

as  leader,  not  only  against  the  Slave-Trade,  l)ut  also 
against  Slavery  itself,  so  that  he  was  hailed  "Father 
of  the  cause  in  England,"  and  was  placed  at  the  head 
of  the  illuati'ioiis  committee  by  which  it  was  conducted, 
though  his  rai*  modesty  prevented  him  from  taking  the 
chair  to  which  he  was  unanimously  elected.  But  no 
modesty  could  cheek  his  valiant  soul  in  conflict  with 
wrong.  Not  conteut  with  his  warfare  in  court,  he  ad- 
dressed Lord  North,  the  Prime  Minister,  warning  him 
in  the  most  earnest  manner  to  take  measures  for  the 
immediate  aholition  of  Slavery  in  all  the  British  do- 
minions, as  utterly  irreconcilable  with  the  principles  of 
the  British  Constitution  and  the  established  rel^ion  of 
the  land,  and  soleroiily  declaring  tha.t  "it  were  better 
for  the  nation  that  their  American  dominions  had  never 
existed,  or  even  that  they  had  sunk  in  the  sea,  tlian  that 
the  kingdom  of  Great  Britain  should  be  loaded  with  the 
horrid  guilt  of  tolerating  such  abominable  wickedness."  ^ 
With  similar  boldness,  in  an  elaborate  work,  he  ar- 
raigned the  doctiine  of  Fasswe  Obedience,  advanced  now 
in  favor  of  judicial  tribunals,  as  once  in  favor  of  kings, 
and  he  openly  affirmed,  as  unquestionable  truth,  that 
every  public  ordinance  contrary  to  reason,  justice,  natu- 
ral equity,  or  the  written  word  of  God,  must  be  promptly 
rejected.^  Other  things,  too,  I  might  mention ;  but  I  am 
admonished  that  I  must  draw  to  a  close.  Pardon  me,  if 
,  I  touch  yet  one  other  shining  point  in  his  career. 

The  news  of  the  Battle  of  Bunker  Hill,  which  reached 
London  at  the  end  of  July,  1775,  found  him  at  his  desk, 
stiU  a  clerk  in  the  Ordnance  Ofhce,  and  by  position 
obliged  to  participate  in  the  military  preparations  now 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GRANVILLE  SHAEP.   513 

required.  He  waa  unwilling  to  lie  concerned,  even  thus 
distantly,  iu  what  he  regarded  as  "  that  unnatural  buai- 
nes3  " ;  and  though  a  close  attendance  on  his  office  for 
seventeen  years,  to  the  neglect  of  all  other  worldly  oppor- 
tunities, made  it  important  to  him  as  a  livelihood,  yet  he 
resolved  to  sacrifice  it.  Out  of  regard  to  his  great  worth 
and  the  respect  he  had  won,  he  was  indulged  at  first 
with  leave  of  absence ;  but  when  hostilities  in  the  Colo- 
niea  advanced  beyond  any  prospect  of  speedy  accommo- 
dation, then  he  vacated  bis  office.  This  man  of  charity, 
who  lived  for  others,  was  now  left  without  support.  But 
he  was  happy  in  the  testimony  he  had  home  to  bis  prin- 
ciples :  nor  was  he  alone.  Lord  Effingham,  and  also  the 
eldest  son  of  Lord  Chatham,  thi'ew  up  commissions  in 
the  army  rather  than  serve  on  the  side  of  injustice. 
They  were  all  clearly  r^bt.  It  is  vain  to  suppose  that 
any  human  ordinance,  whether  from  King,  Parliament, 
or  Judicial  Tribunal,  can  vary  our  moral  responsiblb- 
ties,  or  release  us  from  obedience  to  G-od.  And  since 
no  man  can  stand  between  us  and  God,  it  belongs  to 
each  conscience  for  itself  to  determine  its  final  obliga- 
tions, and  where  pressed  to  an  unrighteous  act,  —  as  if 
to  slay,  or,  what  is  equally  bad,  to  enslave,  a  fellow- 
man  chained  with  no  crime, —  then  at  every  peril  to 
disobey  the  mandate.  The  example  of  Granville  Sharp 
on  this  occasion  is  not  the  least  among  the  large  lega- 
cies of  wisdom  and  fidelity  which  he  has  left  to  man- 
kind. 

All  these  are  especially  commended  to  us,  aa  citizens 
of  the  United  States,  by  the  early  and  constant  interest 
which  he  manifested  in  our  country.  By  pen  and  per- 
sonal intercession  he  vindicated  our  political  rights,  — 
and  when  independence  was  secured,  bis  sympathies  did 


■cibyGoogIc 


514        POSITION  AND  DXITIES  OF  THE  MEECHANT, 


not  abate,  as  witness  bi3  correspondence  -with  Adams, 
Jay,  Franklin,  and  America's  earliest  Abolitionist,  An- 
tbony  Benezet,  His  name  became  an  authority  here,— 
at  the  South  aa  well  as  the  North, —  and  the  colleges, 
including  Brown  University,  Harvard  University,  and 
William  and  Mary,  of  slaveholding  Virginia,  vied  with 
each  other  in  conferring  upon  him  their  highest  aca- 
demic honors.  But  the  growing  numbers  of  the  Epis- 
copal Church  had  occasion  for  special  gratitude,  only  to 
be  repaid  by  loyal  regard  for  his  character  and  life.  On 
separation  from  the  mother  country,  they  were  left  with- 
out Episcopal  head.  To  repak  this  deprivation,  Gran- 
ville Sharp,  in  published  writings  extensively  circulated, 
proposed  the  election  of  bishops  by  the  diurches,  and 
their  subsequent  consecration  in  England,  as  congenial 
to  the  usage  of  early  Christians,  and,  after  much  cor- 
respondence and  many  impedimenta,  enjoyed  the  sat- 
isfaction of  presenting  two  bishops  elect  from  America 
—  one  of  whom  was  the  exemplary  Bishop  White,  of 
Philadelphia  —  to  the  Archbishop  of  Canterbuiy,,  by 
whom  the  Christian  rite  of  laying  on  of  hands  was  per- 
formed; and  thus  was  the  Englisli  Episcopacy  com- 
municated to  this  continent.  I  know  not  that  the  pow- 
erful religious  denomination  befriended  by  him  in  its 
infancy  has  ever  sympathized  mth  the  great  effori  by 
which  his  name  is  exalted ;  but  they  should  at  least  re- 
pel the  weak  imputation,  so  often  levelled  against  all 
who  are  steadfast  i^nst  Slavery,  that  their  benefactor 
was  "  a  man  of  one  idea." 

Mr.  President,  I  have  striven  to  keep  within  the  open 
field  of  history  and  philanthropy,  on  neutral  ground ;  but 
you  would  not  foi^ive  me,  if,  on  this  occasion,  I  forbore 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSTRATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GRANVILLE  SHARP.   515 

to  adduce  the  most  interesting  testimony  of  GranviEe 
Sharp  touching  that  much  debated  clause  in  our  Na- 
tional Constitution  which  has  heen  stretched  to  the  sur- 
render of  fugitive  slaves.  Anterior  to  tlie  Constitution, 
even  during  colonial  days,  he  wrote,  that  any  law  which 
orders  the  arrest  or  rendition  of  fugitive  slaves,  or  iu 
any  way  tends  to  deprive  them  of  legal  protection,  is  to 
be  deemed  "  a  corruption,  null  and  void  in  itseK  " ;  and 
at  a  later  period,  in  an  elaborate  communication  to  the 
Abolition  Society  of  Maryland,  —  mark,  if  you  please,  of 
alaveholding  Maryland,  —  which  was  printed  and  cir- 
culated- by  this  society,  as  "  the  production  of  a  great 
and  respectable  name,"  calculated  to  relieve  persons 
"  embarrassed  by  a  conflict  between  their  principles 
and  the  obUgatioas  imposed  by  unwise  and  perhaps 
unconstitutional  laws,"  he  exposed  the  utter  "illegal- 
ity "  of  Slavery,  and  especially  of  "  taldng  up  slaves 
that  had  escaped  from  their  masters." '  But,  in  a  re- 
markable letter  to  Franklin,  dated  January  10,  1788, — 
a  short  time  after  the  Constitution  had  left  the  hands 
of  the  Convention,  and  some  months  before  its  final 
adoption  by  the  people,  —  and  which  has  never  before 
been  adduced,  even  in  the  thoro\igh  discussion  of  thia 
question,  the  undaunted  champion,  who  had  not  shrunk 
from  conflict  with  the  Chief  Justice  of  England,  open- 
ly anaigned  the  National  Constitution.  Here  are  his 
words, 

"  Having  been  always  zealous  for  the  honor  of  free  govern- 
ments, I  am  the  more  sincerely  grieved  to  see  the  new  Federal 
Constitution  stained  by  the  insertion  of  two  moat  exception- 
able claUBOB  ;  the  one  in  direct  opposition  to  a  most  humane 

id  Society  for  Tromoting  the  Abolition  of  Slavery, 


;db,Googlc 


516         POSITION  AND   DUTIES   OF  THE  MERCHANT, 

article,  ordained  by  the  first  American  Congress  to  be  porpctu- 
ally  obaerved  "  (roferriiig  to  tho  atifforance  of  the  slave-trade 
till  1808);  "aud  the  other,  in  equal  opposition  to  an  express 
command  of  the  Almighty,  '  not  to  deliver  up  the  servant 
that  has  escaped  fi:om  Lis  master,'  etc.  Both  claiisee,  however, 
(the  9th  section  of  the  1st  article,  and  the  latter  part  of 
the  2d  section  of  the  3d  [4th]  article,)  are  so  clearly  mdl  and 
void  Jiy  their  iniquity,  thai  it  wotdd  be  even,  a  crime  to  regard 
them  as  law."  ^ 

It  does  not  appear  that  I'ranklin  ever  answered  this 
letter,  in  the  short  term  of  lifo  which  remained  to  him. 
Eut,  in  justice  to  his  great  name,  I  desire  to  express  my 
conviction  here,  of  course  without  argument,  that  this 
patriot  philosopher  never  attrihuted  to  the  clause,  which 
simply  provides  for  the  surrender  of  fugitives  from 
"  service  or  labor,"  without  the  mention  of  slaves,  any 
such  meaning  as  it  has  since  been  made  to  assume. 
And  Granville  Sharp  himself,  in  putting  upon  it  the 
interpretation  he  did,  forgot  the  judgment  he  had  ex- 
torted from  Lord  Mansfield,  affirming  tJiat  any  law  out 
of  which  Slavery  is  derived  must  he  construed  strictly ; 
and,  stranger  still,  he  forgot  his  own  unanswerable  argu- 
ment, thai  the  word  suves  is  nowhere  to  be  fouTid  in  the 
British  Constitution.  The  question  under  the  fugitive 
clause  of  our  Constitution  is  identical  with  that  happily 
settled  in  England. 

In  works  and  contemplations  like  these  was  the  life 
of  our  philanthropist  prolonged  to  a  generous  old  ^e, 
cheered  by  the  esteem  of  the  good,  informed  by  study, 
and  elevated  by  an  enthusiastic  faith,  which  always  saw 
the  world  as  the  footstool  of  God ;  and  when,  at  last,  in 

1  Memoiis,  p.  3S3. 


;db,Googlc 


ILLUSTEATED  BY  THK  LIFE  OF  GRASVILLE   SHAKP.    517 

1813,  bending  uuder  the  buiden  of  seventy-seven  win- 
ters, he  gently  sank  away,  it  was  felt  that  a  man  had 
died  in  whom  was  the  greatness  ot  goodness.  Among 
the  mourners  at  his  grave  stood  William  Wilberforce ; 
and  over  the  earfclily  remains  of  this  child  of  lowly  be- 
ginnings were  now  dropped  the  tears  of  a  royal  duke. 
The  portals  of  that  great  Temple  of  Honor,  where  are 
treasured  England's  glories,  swung  open  at  the  name  of 
England's  earliest  Abolitionist.  A  simple  tablet,  from 
tlie  chisel  of  Chantrey,  representing  an  African  slave 
on  hia  knees  in  supplication,  and  also  the  lion  and  the 
lamb  lying  down  together,  with  a  suitable  inscription, 
was  placed  in  the  Poet's  Corner  of  Westminster  Abbey, 
in  close  companionship  with  those  atones  which  bear 
the  names  of  Chaucer,  Spenser,  Shakespeare,  Milton, 
Dryden,  Goldsmith,  Gray.  As  the  Muses  themselves 
did  not  disdain  to  watch  over  the  grave  of  one  who  had 
done  well  on  earth,  so  do  the  poets  of  England  keep 
watch  over  the  monument  of  Granville  Sharp.  Kor  is 
his  place  in  that  goodly  company  without  poetical  title. 
The  poet  is  simply  creator;  and  he  who  was  inspired 
to  create  freemen  out  of  slaves  was  poet  of  the  loftiest 
style.  Not  in  the  sacred  Abbey  only  was  our  philan- 
thropist commemorated.  The  city  of  London,  centre  of 
those  Slave- Hunting  merchants  over  whom  his  great  tri- 
umph was  won,  now  gratefully  claimed  part  of  his  re- 
nown. The  marble  bust  of  England's  earliest  Abolition- 
ist was  installed  at  Guildhall,  home  of  metropolitan  jus- 
tice, pomp,  and  hftspitality,  in  the  precise  spot  where 
once  had  stood  the  bust  of  Nelson,  England's  greatest 
Admiral,  and  beneath  it  was  carved  a  simple  tribute, 
of  more  perennial  worth  than  all  the  trophies  of  Tiaf- 
algar: — 


■cibyGoogIc 


POSITION  AND   DUTIES   OF  THE  MEKCHAHT, 
GRANVILLE   SHARP, 

TO   WHOM  ENGLAND   OWES   THE   GLORIOUS  VEKDIOT 

OP  HEll  HIGHEST   COURT   OP  LAW, 

THAT  THE  SLAVE    WHO   BBia   HIS    FOOT   ON 

BRITISH   GaoUND 

BECOMES   THAT   INSTANT 


Gentlemen  of  tlie  Mercantile  Library  Association,  — 
such  was  Granville  Sharp,  and  such  honors  England  to 
her  hero  paid.  And  now,  if  it  be  asked,  why,  in  enforcing 
the  duties  of  the  Good  Merchant,  I  select  his  name,  the 
answer  is  prompt.  It  is  in  him  that  the  merchant,  suc- 
cessor to  the  chivalrous  kn^ht,  aiming  to  fulfil  his  whole 
duly,  may  find  a  truer  prototype  than  in  any  stunted, 
though  successful  votary  of  trade,  while  the  humble  cir- 
cumstances of  his  life  seem  to  make  him  an  easy  exam- 
ple. Imitating  him,  commerce  would  thrive  none  the  less, 
but  goodness  more.  Business  would  not  be  checked, 
but  it  would  cease  to  he  pursued  as  the  "  one  idea"  of 
life.  Wealth  would  still  abound;  but  there  would  be 
also  that  sohd  virtue,  never  to  be  moved  from  truth, 
which,  you  will  admit,  even  without  the  admonition  of 
Plato,  is  better  than  all  the  cunning  of  Dffidalus  or  all 
the  treasures  of  Tantalus.'  The  hardness  of  heart  en- 
gendered hy  the  accursed  greed  of  gain,  and  by  the 
madness  of  worldly  ambition,  would  be  overcome :  the 
perverted  practice,  that  Policy  is  the  best  Rormty,  would 
be  reversed ;  and  Merchants  would  he  recalled,  gently,  hut 
irresistibly,  to  the  great  PEACtical  DUTIES  of  this  age,  and 
thus  win  the  palm  of  true  honesty,  which  trade  alone 
can  never  bestow, 

1  Eulhyphron,  J  12. 


■cibyGoogIc 


ILLUSIEATED  BY  THE  LIFE  OF  GBASVILLE  SIIAEP.   519 

"  Who  is  the  Honest  Man  ? 
He  that  doth  still  and  sirOEgly  good  purauo, 
To  God.  his  neighbor,  and  himself,  tnont  true."  l- 

TouNG  Merchahts  of  Boston  !  I  have  spoten  to 
you  frankly  and  faithfully,  trusting  that  you  would 
franldy  and  faithfully  hearken  to  me.  And  now,  in  the 
henison  once  bestowed  upon  the  youthful  Knight,  I 
take  my  leave :  "  Go  forth !  be  brave,  loyal,  and  a 
full" 

1  Herbert,  The  Temple:  Omatanci/- 


■cibyGoogIc 


WAGES  OP  SEAIEJT  IN  CASE  OF  WRECK. 


I.L  TO  SECURE  WaGES  T( 

Febhuary  12,  1855. 


"  RenAsed,  That  the  Committco  on  Commerco  be  directed  to  ooneider  if 
any  legislfttion  ba  needed  in  order  to  secure  tlie  wnges  of  merohnnt  naamen 
in  the  case  of  wi^eok." 

On  the  12tli  of  February,  1855,  Mr.  Sumner  followed  up  this  resolu- 
tion by  introducing  &  bill,  which  was  read  twice  and  refeiied  to  the 
Committee  on  Commerce,  as  follows :  ■ — 

"  A  Bill  to  lecare  Wn^ea  lo  Seamen  in  can  of  Wreck. 

"  Be  if  enacted,  &c.,  That,  in  case  of  wreck  or  loss  of  any  ship  or  yesBel  of 
the  United  States,  every  seaman  belonging  thereto  shall  be  entitled  to  his 
wages  up  to  the  period  of  such  wreolc  or  Ions,  whether  such  ship  or  vessel 
shall  or  shall  not  have  prBviously  earned  freight,  provided  such  seaman 
shall  have  exerted  himself  to  the  utmost  to  eave  the  ship,  enrgo,  and  sloresi 
and  in  any  trial  of  the  question  of  services,  tbe  mastei',  altliotigh  a  party  to 
the  suit,  shall  be  a  competent  witness  on  this  question. 

'■Seo.2.  And  be  ii  further  enacted.  That  every  stipulation,  by  which  any 
seaman  shall  consent  to  abandon  his  wages,  in  case  of  wreck  or  loss  of  the 
ship  orvessel,  or  incaseofthe  ftilnre  to  earn  freight,  eh  oil  be  wholly  void." 

On  this  bill  Mr.  Sumner  epoke  as  follows. 

ME.   PRESIDENT,  —  111  introdcciiig  this   Ml,   I 
desire  to  make  a  brief  explanation,  -which  shall, 
at  least,  te  a  record  of  my  views  with  regard  to  it. 

The  hill  proposes  an  amelioration  of  the  existing 
Maritime  Law  in  respect  to  the  wages  of  merchant  sea- 
men, which,  80  far  as  England  is  concerned,  has  been 


■cibyGoogIc 


WAGES   OF   SEAMEN  IS   CASE  OF  WRECK.  5Zl 

made  already  by  Act  of  Parliament,  and  in  our  cotmtry 
can  be  accomplished  only  by  Act  of  Congress. 

By  existing  Maritime  Law,  the  seaman's  wages  depend 
npon  a  technical  rule,  which  aometimea  occasions  hard- 
ship. Freight  is  compendiously  aaid  to  be  the  mother 
of  wages.  In  conformity  with  this  fanciful  idea,  wages 
are  made  to  depend  npon  the  earning  of  freight,  unless 
the  freight  is  waived  by  agreement  of  the  owner,  or  the 
voyt^e  or  freight  is  lost  by  negligence,  fraud,  or  miscon- 
duct of  the  owner  or  master,  or  voluntarily  abandoned. 
In  case  of  wreck,  the  sailor  has  simply  the  chance  of 
something  under  the  name  of  salvage,  if  the  fragments 
saved  happen  to  be  of  any  value ;  but  if  the  loss  be  to- 
tal, then  he  is  without  remedy.  In  wrecks,  which  occur 
with  melancholy  frequency,  on  our  churlish  winter  coast, 
this  hardship  adds  even  to  the  sorrows  of  disaster.  Thus, 
as  in  a  case  which  has  actually  arisen,  a  crew  may  com- 
mence service  at  Calcutta,  may  navigate  the  Indian 
Ocean,  double  the  Cape  of  Good  Hope,  and  bring  their 
ship  safely  witiiin  sight  of  land,  and  then,  by  total  loss 
of  ship  and  cargo,  from  acknowledged  perils  of  the  sea, 
they  may  lose  everythii^,  even  their  right  to  wages, 
and  may  find  themselves  in  a  strange  port,  the  prey 
of  poverty.  Nor  can  any  merit,  either  throughout  the 
protracted  voy'i"e  or  in  the  hour  of  peril  and  shipwreck, 
prevent  tl  e  oj  erat  on  of  tl  s  technical  rule. 

Tl  e  e  s  ilso  anotl  er  cumstance  which  constrains 
the  poor  a  lo  11  e  ner  may  insure  his  ship,  and 
also  his  f  e  It  so  tl  at  1  e  may  lose  nothing  but  the 
prem  unleivs  bttle  sailor  is  not  allowed  to  pro- 
tect himself  by  insurance  from  loss  of  wages :  his  loss 
is  literally  total. 

Now  this  technical  rule,  which  fastens  the  wages  of 


■cibyGoogIc 


522  WAGES  OF  SEAMEU,  IN   CASE   OF  WEECK. 

the  aailor  to  the  foi-tunes  of  the  vessel,  or,  in  other  words, 
makes  the  right  dependent  on  the  successful  issue  of 
the  enterprise  for  which  he  is  hired,  must  be  consid- 
ered an  offshoot  of  Mediteval  Maritime  Law.  It  is  not 
found  in  the  Eoman  Law,  nor  in  the  maritime  legislation 
of  the  Eastern  Empire,  nor  in  that  early  compilation 
which  goes  under  the  name  of  the  Ehodian  Laws.  An 
eminent  American  judge,  who  sheds  great  light  upon 
maritime  jurisprudence, — I  refer  to  the  learned  and  able 
Judge  Ware,  of  the  District  Court  of  Maine,-— says,  in 
a  judicial  opinion,  that  "  it  owes  its  origin  to  the  ne- 
cessities and  peculiar  hazards  which  maritime  commerce 
had  to  encounter  in  the  Middle  Ages,  when  to  the  dan- 
gers of  the  winds  and  waves  were  added  the  more  for- 
midable perils  of  piracy  and  robbery."  ^  The  rule,  hav- 
ing been  thus  established,  was  preserved  iii  the  mari- 
time jurisprudence  of  Europe,  when  the  special  exi- 
gencies in  which  it  had  its  birth  ceased  to  exist.  It 
has  outhved  the  circumstances  and  excuses  of  its  ori- 
f!in,  and  now  survives  to  vex,  oppress,  and  disappoint 
the  most  needy,  if  not  the  most  meritorious,  of  all  con- 
cerned in  the  business  of  the  seas. 

This  hard  rule  survives  with  us,  but  not  everywhere. 
The  greatest  commercial  nation  of  the  world  has  led  the 
way  in  its  abolition,  and  set  an  example  to  the  United 
States.  The  Act  of  Parhament,  of  7th  and  8th  Victoria, 
ch.  112,  sec.  17  (at  the  close),  —  called  "  The  Merchant 
Seamen's  Act,"  —  provides  that 

"  In  all  cases  of  wreck  or  loss  of  the  ship,  every  surviving 
Baaman  shall  be  entitled  to  his  wages  up  to  the  period  of  the 
wreck  or  loss  of  the  ship,  whether  such  ship  shaU  or  shall 
rstJiavepredously  earned  freight:  provided  the  seaman  shall 

1  Tkt  Daunt,  Daveis,  133. 


■cibyGoogIc 


WAGES   OF   SEAMEN  IH   CASE   OF  WSECK.  523 

produce  a  certificate  from  the  master  cr  chief  eurvmng  offi- 
cer of  the  ship,  to  the  effect  that  he  had  eaerted  himself  to 
the  utmost  to  save  the  ship,  cai^,  and  etores." 

But  the  sailor  was  not  completely  protected  by  this 
provisioii.  Experience  in  England  showed  that  the  cun- 
ning of  agents  was  ahle  to  introduce  into  the  shipping 
articles  an  agreement  waiving  the  right  to  wages  in  case 
of  loss,  which  the  unthrifty  sailor  signed,  ignorant  or 
careless  of  its  import.  To  remedy  this  ahuse,  a  further 
Act  of  Parliament,  of  13th  and  14th  Victoria,  ch.  93. 
sec.  53,  —  known  as  "The  Mercantile  Marine  Act,"  — 

"  No  eeamaii  shall,  by  reason  of  any  agreement,  forfeit  his 
lien  upon  the  ship,  or  be  deprived  of  any  remedy  for  the  re- 
covery of  his  WBges,  to  which  he  would  otherwise  have  been 
entitled ;  and  every  stipulation  which  is  inconsistent  with 
any  provision  of  this  Act,  or  of  any  other  Act  relating  to 
merchant  seamen,  and  every  stipulation  by  which  any  sea- 
man consents  to  ahaitdon  his  rigid  to  vmges  in  the  ease  of  the 
loss  of  the  skip,  or  to  abandon  any  right  which  he  may  have 
or  obtain  in  the  nature  of  salvage,  shall  be  wholly  irt02>era-. 


The  bUl  which  I  now  introduce  is  grounded  on  the 
provisions  quoted  from  the  two  Acts  of  the  British  Par- 
liament, and  contains  two  principles  r  first,  that  seamen 
shall  be  paid  their  wages  down  to  the  time  of  the  loss 
of  the  ship,  in  case  they  serve  faithfiJly  to  the  last ;  and, 
secondly,  that  they  shall  not  be  permitted  to  lose  their 
wages  through  any  agreement  in  the  shipping  articles. 

In  some  details  I  have  departed  from  the  British  Act 
It  does  not  seem  advisable  to  make  the  wages  depend- 
ent on  "  a  certificate  from  the  master  or  chief  survivir^ 
officer  of  the  ship,"  hut  to  leave  the  question  of  services 


■cibyGoogIc 


524  WAGES   OF  SEAMEN   IN   CASE   OF  WEECK. 

open  to  proof  in  any  way,  according  to-  received  rules  of 
evidence.  Therefore  I  have  said  that  the  w^es  shall 
be  paid,  "provided  the  seaman  shall  have  exerted  him- 
self to  the  utmost  to  save  the  ship,  cargo,  and  stores." 
The  reasons  for  this  course  are  cleajr.  Masters  are  often 
part  owners  of  American  ships,  and  thus  have  a  personal 
interest  adverse  to  the  sailor.  In  a  mood  of  selfishness 
or  recklessness,  they  might  refuse  the  certificate,  even 
though  well  earned,  Now,  in  constracting  a  protection 
to  the  sailor,  it  does  not  seem  prudent  to  make  his  w^ea 
dependent  upon  any  such  quarter.  Indeed,  it  is  hardly 
just  to  take  from  him  the  right  to  estabhsh  his  claim 
hefore  the  Admiralty  Court,  merely  because  an  inter- 
ested master  refuses  a  certificate,  when,  perhaps,  ple- 
nary proof  might  be  furnished  aliunde.  Moreover,  if 
the  question  were  put  in  control  of  the  master,  he  might 
obtain  an  improper  influence  over  the  minds  of  the 
crew,  inducing  them  even  to  sacrifice  truth  in  the  event 
of  litigation  between  owners  and  underwriters. 

There  can  be  no  harm  in  leaving  the  qxiestion  of  fact  to 
be  proved  by  competent  witnesses,  hke  every  other  ques- 
tion of  fact :  and  the  seamen  should  be  competent  wit- 
nesses for  each  other.  A  sagacious  court  will  know 
how  to  weigh  their  testimony,  should  it  come  in  conflict 
with  that  of  the  officers.  It  seems  proper  that  the  mas- 
ter, too,  though  a  party  to  the  suit,  —  as  jn  the  case  of  a 
libel  against  him  in  personam,  or  in  a  suit  at  Common 
Law, —  should  be  competent  to  testify  to  the  conduct  of 
the  libellant  or  plaintiif,  —  in  other  words,  whether  he 
has  "  exerted  himself  to  the  utmost " ;  and  I  have  intro- 
duced into  the  bill  a  provision  accordingly. 

The  British  Act  of  7th  and  8th  Victoria  contains 
another  defect.   It  limits  the  wages  to  "  every  surviving 


■cibyGoogIc 


■WAGES   OP   SEAMEN  IN  CASE  OF  WRECK.  525 

seaman,"  I  can  see  no  good  reason  why  the  wife  and 
children  of  the  sailor  who  haa  perished  in  the  forlorn 
hope  perhaps,  in  the  cause  of  all,  should  be  deprived  of 
the  humble  wages  so  dearly  earned  by  their  natural  pro- 
tector, and  thus  be  compelled  to  feel  a  new  deprivation 
added  to  their  bereavement  In  the  proposed  bill  there 
ia  no  such  limitation. 

Beyond  this  brief  statement,  I  need  not  on  this  occa- 
sion add  another  word.  Already  Congress  has  shown 
a  disposition  to  modify  the  rigorous  Maritime  Law  in 
some  of  its  provisions.  In  1851  it  made  a  change  in 
the  liability  of  ship-owners  as  common  carriers.  But 
this  very  liability  origuiated,  to  a  certain  extent,  in  the 
same  principles  from  which  ia  derived  the  liability  of 
the  aeamen,  if  they  fail  to  bring  the  ship  and  cargo  to 
port.  Ship-owners  and  sailors  were  both  treated  as 
insurers.  This  was  in  the  age  of  force,  before  the  con- 
tract of  insurance  had  spread  its  broad  protection  over 
commerce  in  every  sea.  The  seaman  should  share  this 
protection.  He  should  he  treated  as  not  necessarily 
either  pirate  or  coward. 

In  the  discussions  of  the  Senate  on  the  proposed 
change  in  the  liability  of  ship-owners,  it  was  effectively 
ui^ed  by  my  immediate  predecessor,  a  distinguished 
Senator  from  Massachusetts,  the  late  Robert  Eantoul,  Jr., 
that,  if  the  United  States  failed  to  adopt  that  measure, 
the  other  maritime  nations  would  have  an  advantage  in 
the  carrying  trade.  It  is  equally  true,  that,  unless  we 
adopt  the  measure  now  proposed,  Great  Britain  will 
have  the  advantage  of  u9  in  the  rate  of  seamen's  wages  ; 
for,  under  her  existing  laws,  the  seaman  can  afford  to 
work  cheaper  on  board  a  Britisli  ship  than  under  the 
American  flag. 


■cibyGoogIc 


526  WAGES   OF  SEAMEH  IN  CASE  OF  WEECK. 

The  measure  now  proposed  is  of  direct  importance  to 
the  hundred  and  iifty  thousand  seamen  constituting  the 
mercantile  marine  of  the  United  States.  It  also  concerns 
the  million  of  men  constituting  the  mercantile  marine 
of  the  civilized  world,  any  of  whom,  in  the  vicissitudes 
of  the  sea,  may  iind  themselves  in  American  bottoms. 
I  eonmiend  it  as  a  measure  of  enlightened  philanthropy, 
and  also  of  simple  justice. 

I  ask  that  the  bill,  having  been  read  twice,  be  referred 
to  the  Committee  on  Commerce. 

The  motion  was  agreed  to. 


■cibyGoogIc 


AGAINST  CAPITAL  PUNISHMENT. 

Letter  to  a  Committee  of  the  HASSAOiiuaETTS  Legislatdre, 
February  12,  1855. 


Senate  Chamdeh,  Febniaiy  12,  1855. 

DEAE  SIE,  —  In  response  to  your  inquiry,  I  "beg 
leave  to  say,  that  I  am  happy  in  an  oppoi-tunity 
to  hear  my  testimony  gainst  Capital  Punishment.  My 
instincts  were  ever  against  it  and  fiom  the  time  when, 
while  yet  a  student  of  law,  I  read  the  classical  report  to 
the  L^islatnre  of  Louisiana  by  tint  iLlu<(trious  jurist, 
Edward  Livingston,  I  have  lieen  constantly  glad  to  find 
my  instincts  confirmed  by  reison  Nothing  of  ai™u- 
ment  or  experience  since  has  m  any  respect  shaken  the 
original  and  perpetual  repugnance  with  which  I  have 
regarded  it.  Punishment  is  justly  inflicted  hy  human 
power,  with  a  twofold  purpose :  first,  for  the  protection 
of  society,  and,  secovAly,  for  the  reformation  of  the  of- 
fender. Now  it  seems  to  me  clear,  that,  in  our  age  and 
country,  the  taking  of  human  life  is  not  necessary  to  the 
protection  of  society,  while  it  reduces  the  period  of  ref- 
ormation to  a  nan-ow,  fleeting  span.  If  not  necessary, 
it  cannot  come  within  the  province  of  self-defence,  and 
is  unjustifiable. 

It  is  sad  to  believe  that  much  of  the  prejudice  in 
favor  of  the  gallows  may  be  traced  to  three  discredita- 
ble sources :  first,  the  spirit  of  vengeance,  which  surely 
does  not  properly  belong  to  man ;  secondly,  unworthy 


■cibyGoogIc 


526  AGAINSI  CAPITAL  PUNISHMENT. 

timidity,  as  if  a  powerful,  civilized  eoimnunity  would  be 
in  peril,  if  life  were  not  sometimes  taken  by  the  govern- 
ment; and,  thirdly,  blind  obedience  to  the  traditions  of 
another  age.  But  rack,  thumbscrew,  wheel,  iron  crown, 
bed  of  steel,  and  every  instrument  of  barbarous  toiiui'e, 
now  rejected  witli  horror,  were  once  upheld  by  the  same 
spirit  of  vengeance,  the  same  timidity,  and  the  same 
tradition  of  another  age. 

I  ti-ust  that  the  time  is  at  hand,  when  Massachusetts, 
turning  from  the  vindictive  gaUows,  will  provide  a  com- 
prehensive system  of  punishment,  which  by  just  penal- 
ties and  privations  shall  deter  from  guilt,  and  by  just 
benevolence  and  care  shall  promote  the  reformation  of 
its  unhappy  subjects.  Then,  and  not  till  then,  will  om- 
beloved  Commonwealth  imitate  the  Divine  Justice,  which 
"  desireth  not  the  death  of  a  sinner,  but  rather  tliat  he 
may  turn  from  his  wickedness  and  hve." 


e  me,  dear  Sir,  very  faithfully  yours, 

Charles  Sumnee. 
To  THE  Ckairmak  of  tee  Committed 


■cibyGoogIc 


THE  DEMANDS  OF  FEEEDOM : 
KEPKAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT. 

■EECU   IN    TEE    SeNATE    AGAINST   Mk.  ToUCEY's   BiLL,    AND   TOR 

Hepeal  of  the  FuGii'iVE  Slave  Act,  February  23,  1855. 


Oh  the  2M  of  Jebniaiy,  1855,  on  motion  of  Mr.  Toncey,  of  Con- 
necticut, the  Senate  proceeded  to  the  consideration  of  "a  bill  to  pto- 
(eet  officers  and  other  persons  acting  under  the  authority  of  the  United 
States,"  by  which  it  was  provided  that  "  suits  oommeneeil  or  pending 
in  any  State  Court  against  any  officer  of  the  United  States,  or  other 
person,  tor  or  on  account  of  any  act  done  under  any  law  of  the  United 
States,  or  under  color  thei'eof,  or  for  or  on  account  of  any  right,  au- 
thority, claim,  or  title  set  up  by  such  officer  or  other  peiaon,  under  any 
law  of  the  United  States,"  should  be  removed  for  tiial  to  the  Circuit 
Court  of  the  United  States.  It  was  seen  at  once  that  under  these 
words  an  attempt  was  made  to  oust  the  State  Courts  of  cases  arising 
from  trespasses  and  damages  under  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act ;  and  the 
bill  was  pressed,  as  everything  for  Slavery  was  always  pressed,  even  on 
Friday,  to  the  exclusion  of  the  private  claims  to  which  that  day  was 
devoted  under  the  rules  of  the  Senate.  A  debate  commenced,  which 
was  continued  with  much  animation  and  feeling  late  into  the  night. 

Mr.  Sumner  seized  this  opportunity  to  urge  agahi  his  proposition 
to  repeal  the  Fiiptive  Slave  Act.  Just  before  the  final  question,  he 
took  the  floor  and  spoke  as  follows. 


ME.  PRESIDENT,—  On  a  former  occasion,  as  Sla- 
very was  aljout  to  clntch  one  of  its  triumphs,  I 
rose  to  make  my  final  opposition  at  midnight.  It  is  now 
the  same  hour.  Slavery  is  pressing  again  for  its  accus- 
tomed victory,  which  I  undertake  again  for  the  moment 
to  arrest.  It  is  hardly  an  accidental  conjunction  which 
constantly  brings  Slavery  and  midnight  together. 


■cibyGoogIc 


530  THE  DEMANDS   OF  FEEEDOM  : 

Since  eleven  o'clock  this  forenoon  we  have  been  in  our 
seats,  detained  by  the  dominant  majority,  wliich,  in  sub- 
servience to  Slavery,  refuses  to  postpone  this  q^uestion  or 
to  adjourn.  AU  other  things  are  neglected.  Various  pub- 
lic interests,  at  this  late  stage  of  the  session,  demand- 
ing attention,  are  put  aaide.  According  to  usage  of  the 
Senate,  Triday  is  devoted  to  private  claims.  I  am  ac- 
customed to  call  it  our  day  of /ws^-ice,—  glad,  that,  since 
these  matters  are  referred  to  us,  at  least  one  day  in  the 
week  is  thus  set  apart.  But  Slavery  grasps  this  whole 
day,  and  changes  it  to  a  day  of  injustice.  By  the  calen- 
dar, which  I  hold  in  my  hand,  it  appears  that  upwards 
of  seventy-five  private  hills,  witli  which  are  associated 
hopes  and  fears  of  widows  and  orphans,  and  of  all  who 
come  to  Congress  for  relief,  are  ou  your  table,  —  neg- 
lected, ay.  Sir,  sacrificed,  to  the  bill  now  urged  with  so 
much  pertinacity.  like  Juggernaut,  the  bill  is  driven 
over  prosti-ats  victims.     And  here  is  another  sacrifice  to 


I  do  not  adequately  expose  this  bill,  when  I  say  it  is 
a  sacrifice  to  Slavery.  It  is  a  sacrifice  to  Slavery  in  its 
most  odious  form.  Bad  as  Slavery  is,  it  is  not  so  bad 
as  huntii^  slaves.  There  is  seeming  apology  for  Sla- 
very at  home,  in  States  where  it  prevails,  founded  on 
difficulties  in  the  position  of  the  master  and  the  rela^ 
tions  of  personal  attachment  it  sometimes  excites  ;  but 
every  apology  fails,  when  you  seek  again  to  enslave  the 
fugitive  whom  the  master  cannot  detain  by  duress  or 
kindness,  and  who,  by  courage  and  intelligence,  under 
guidance  of  the  North  Star,  can  achieve  a  happy  free- 
dom. Sir,  there  is  wide  difference  between  Slaveholder 
and  Slave -Hunter. 

But  the  bill  before  you  is  to  aid  in  the  chase  of  slaves. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL   OF  THE   FUGITIVE   SLAVE   ACT.  631 

This  is  its  object.  This  is  its  "  being's  end  and  aim." 
And  this  bill,  with  this  object,  is  pressed  upon  tlie  Sen- 
ate by  the  honorable  Senator  from  Connecticut  [Mr. 
Toucey].  Not  from  slave  soil,  but  ixom  free  soil,  comes 
tliig  effort.  A  Senator  from  the  North,  a  Senator  from 
New  England,  lends  himself  to  the  work,  and  with  un- 
natural zeal  helps  to  bind  still  stronger  the  fetter  of  the 
slave. 

Mr.  Rusk  (of  Texas)  [interrv.ptinff].  Will  the  honorable 
Senator  allow  me  to  interrupt  himl 

Me.  Sumner.     Certainly. 

Mr.  Etok.  I  aak  him  to  point  out  the  words  in  this  bill 
where  Slavery  is  mentioned. 

Mr.  Sumnee.  I  am  glad  the  Senator  from  Texas  asks 
the  question,  for  it  brings  attention  at  once  to  the  true 
character  of  tliis  biU.  I  know  its  language  well,  and 
also  its  plausible  title.  On  its  face  it  purports  to  be  "  a 
bill  to  protect  officers  and  other  persons  acting  under 
the  authority  of  the  United  States  " ;  and  it  provides 
for  the  transfer  of  certain  proceedings  from  State  Courts 
to  the  Circuit  Courts  of  the  United  States.  And  yet. 
Sir,  by  the  admission  of  this  whole  debate,  stretching 
from  noon  to  midnight,  it  is  a  bill  to  bolster  up  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Act 

Mr.  Rdsk.  I  have  not  listened  to  the  debate,  but  I  ask 
the  Senator  to  point  out  in  the  bill  the  plaoe  where  Slavery 
is  mentioned.  If  the  Constitution  and  laws  appoint  officers, 
and  require  them  to  discharge  duties,  will  he  abandon  them 
to  the  mob  ? 

Me.  Sumher.  The  Senator  asks  me  to  point  oiit  any 
place  in  this  bill  where  "  Slavery  "  is  mentioned.  Wliy, 
Sir,  this  is  quite  unnecessary.     I  m^ht  ask  the  Senator 


■cibyGoogIc 


532  THE  DEMANDS  OF  FKEEDOM; 

to  point  out  any  place  in  tlie  Constitution  of  the  Uniteil 
States  where  "  Slavery  "  is  mentioned,  or  where  the  word 
"  slave  "  can  be  found,  and  he  could  not  do  it. 

Mb.  Rusk.  That  is  evading  the  question.  I  asked  the 
Senator  to  point  out  in  the  bill  the  clause  where  Slavery 
is  mentioned.  The  bill  proposes  to  protect  officers  of  the 
United  States,  whom  you  appoint,  in  disohaigiug  their  du- 
ties.    If  they  are  to  be  left  unprotectet!,  repeal  your  law. 

Mr.  Summer.  I  respond  to  the  Senator  with  all  my 
heart,  "Eepeal  your  law."  Yes,  Sir,  repeal  the  Fi^itive 
Act,  which  now  requires  the  support  of  supplementary 
legislation.  Remove  this  ground  of  offence.  And  before 
I  sit  down,  I  hope  to  make  that  very  motion.  Mean- 
while I  evade  no  question  propounded  by  the  honora- 
ble Senator ;  but  I  do  not  consider  it  necessary  to  show 
that  "Slavery"  is  mentioned  in  the  bill.  It  may  not  be 
found  tliere  in  name ;  but  Slavery  is  the  very  soul  of 
the  bUl. 

[Mr.  Rttsk  roae.] 

Me,  Sumree.  The  Senator  has  interrupted  me  sev- 
eral times ;  he  may  do  it  more ;  but  perhaps  he  had 
better  let  me  go  on. 

Mr.  Etibk.  I  understand  tho  Senator;  bxit  I  make  no 
boast  of  that  sort. 

Me.  Sumner.  Very  well.  At  last  I  am  allowed  to 
proceed.  Of  the  bOl  in  question  I  have  little  to  say. 
Its  technical  character  has  been  exposed  by  various 
Senators,  and  especially  by  my  valued  friend  from  Ohio 
[Mr.  Chase]  who  opened  this  debate.  Suffice  it  to  say, 
that  it  is  an  intrusive  and  offensive  encroachment  on 
State  Eights,  calculated  to  subvert  the  power  of  States  Jn 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  533 

the  protection  of  the  citizen.  This  consideration  alone 
would  be  ample  to  secure  its  rejection,  if  the  attachment 
to  State  Eighta,  so  often  avowed  by  Senators,  were  not 
utterly  lost  in  stronger  attachment  to  Slavery.  But  on 
these  things,  although  well  worthy  of  attention,  I  do 
not  dwell.  Objectionable  as  the  biU  may  he  on  this 
ground,  it  becomes  much  more  so  when  regarded  as  an 
effort  to  holster  up  the  Fugitive  Slave  Act 

Of  this  Act  it  is  difficult  to  speak  with  moderation. 
Conceived  in  defiance  of  the  Constitution,  and  in  utter 
disregard  of  every  sentiment  of  justice  and  humanity,  it 
should  he  treated  as  an  outlaw.  It  may  have  the  form 
of  legislation,  but  it  lacks  every  essential  element  of 
law.  I  have  so  often  exposed  its  character  on  this  floor, 
that  I  shall  he  brief  now. 

There  is  an  a^ument  against  it  which  has  especial 
importance  at  this  moment,  when  the  Fugitive  Act  is 
.made  the  occasion  of  new  assault  on  State  Rights.  TJiis 
very  Ad  is  an  asmmption  by  Congress  of  power  not  dele- 
gated to  it  wnder  the  Constitviion,  and  an  infraetixm 
of  rights  secured  to  the  States.  Ton  will  mark,  if  you 
please,  the  double  aspect  of  this  proposition,  in  asserting 
not  only  an  assumption  of  power  by  Congress,  but  an 
infraction  of  State  Eights.  And  this  proposition,  I  ven- 
ture to  say,  defies  answer  or  cavil.  Show  me.  Sir,  if 
you  can,  the  clause,  sentence,  or  word  in  the  Constitu- 
tion which  gives  to  Congress  any  power  to  legislate  on 
this  subject.  I  challenge  honorable  Senators  to  produce 
it.  I  fearlessly  assert  that  it  cannot  be  found.  The 
obligations  imposed  by  the  "fv^tive"  clause,  io/iote'er 
they  may  he}  rest  upon  States,  and  not  upon  C 


■cibyGoogIc 


534  THE   DEMANDS   OF   FEEEDOM  : 

1  do  not  now  undertake  to  say  what  tliese  obligations 
are, —  but  simply,  that,  whether  much  or  little,  they 
rest  upon  States.  And  this  interpretation  is  sustained 
by  the  practice  of  Congress  on  another  kindred  q^ues- 
tion.  The  associate  clause  touching  "  privileges  of  citi- 
zens "  is  never  made  a  source  of  power.  It  will  be  in 
the  recollection  of  the  Senate,  that,  durii^  the  last  ses- 
sion, the  Senator  from  Louisiana  [Mr.  Benjamin],  in 
answer  to  a  question  from  me,  openly  admitted  that 
there  were  laws  of  the  Southern  States,  bearing  haKl 
upon  colored  citizens  of  the  North,  which  were  uncon- 
stitutional ;  but  when  I  pressed  the  honorable  Sena- 
tor with  the  question,  whether  he  would  introduce  or 
sustain  a  bill  to  cany  out  the  clause  of  the  Constitu- 
tion securing  to  these  citizens  their  rights,  he  declined 
to  answer. 

Mb  Ben  A  I  \  I  th  nk  Mr  Pre  lent  I  ha  a  „!  t  f  n 
set  tl  0  c  o  d  st  a  gl  t  po  thdt  po  nt  I  r  so  n  tl  e  Se 
ate  on  tho  o  cas  on  refe  Ted  t  as  w  11  be  perfectly  well 
lecollected  bj  every  Senator  present  and  put  espect 
f  1  J  est  to  tl  e  Se  ator  from  Massachusetts.  Instead 
of  a  epl  to  my  ]  est  n  he  put  a  quest  on  to  ne  wh  ch 
I  anawe  el  and  tie  I  p  t  y  q  est  on  In'stend  ot  e 
plyi  g  to  th  t  1  0  a„  p  t  i  [  est  on  to  me  ( ons  de 
iHo  that  as  an  absolute  evasion  of  the  question  which  I  pit 
to  him,  I  decliued  having  anything  fm-ther  to  say  in  the  dis- 
cussion. 

Mr  Sumubr.  The  Senator  from  Louisiana  will  par- 
don me,  if  I  suggest  that  there  is  an  incontrovertible 
fact  which  shows  that  the  evasion  was  on  his  part.  The 
record  testifies  not  only  that  he  did  not  reply,  but  that 
I  was  cut  off  from  replying  by  efforts  and  votes  of  him- 
self and  liis  friends.     Let  him  consult  the  "  Coi^jres- 


■cibyGooglc 


REPEAL  OE  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  535 

sional  Globe,"  and  he  will  find  it  all  there.^  I  can  con- 
ceive that  it  might  be  embarrassing  for  Mm  to  reply, 
since,  had  he  declined  to  carry  out  the  clause  in  ques- 
tion, it  would  be  awkward,  at  least,  to  vindicate  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Act,  which  is  derived  from  an  identical 
clause  in  the  Constitution.  And  yet  there  are  Senators 
on  this  floor,  who,  careless  of  the  flagrant  inconsisten- 
cy, vindicate  the  exercise  of  power  by  Congress  under 
the  "  fugitive  "  clause,  while  their  own  States  at  home 
deny  any  power  of  Congress  under  the  associate  clause, 
on  the  "  privileges  of  citizens,"  assume  to  themselves 
complete  right  to  determine  the  obligations  of  this 
clause,  and  then,  in  practical  illustration  of  their  as- 
sumption, ruthlessly  seE  into  Slavery  colored  citizens 
of  the  B^orth. 

Mr.  Butlbb  [inlerrvptmff].  Does  the  Senator  allude  to 
my  State  ? 

Mr,  Eusk.     No,  —  to  mine. 

Mr.  EiTTLEa  If  he  means  South  Carolina,  I  wiU  reply  to 
him. 

Mr,  SumneB-  I  do  allude  to  South  Carolina,  and  al- 
so to  other  Southern  States,  —  but  especially  to  South 
Carohna.  If  I  allude  to  these  States,  it  ia  not  to  bring 
up  and  array  the  hardships  of  individual  instances,  but 
simply  to  show  the  position  occupied  by  them  on  a  con- 
stitutional question,  identical  with  that  in  the  fugitive 
Act.  And  now,  at  the  risk  of  repetition,  if  I  can  have 
your  attention  for  a  brief  moment,  without  interruption, 
I  will  endeavor  to  state  anew  this  argument. 

The  rules  of  interpretation,  applicable  to  the  clause  of 
the  Constitution  securing  to  "  the  citizens  of  each  State 


■cibyGoogIc 


53G  THE    DEMANDS  OF   FREEDOM: 

all  privileges  and  immunities  of  pitizens  in  the  several 
States,"  are  equally  applicable  to  its  associate  clause, 
forming  part  of  the  same  section,  in  the  same  article, 
and  providing  that  "  persons  held  to  service  or  labor  in 
one  State,  under  the  laws  thereof,  escaping  into  another, 
shall  be  dehvered  up,  on  claim  of  the  party  to  ■whom 
such  service  or  labor  may  be  due."  Of  this  there  can' 
be  no  doubt. 

If  one  of  these  clauses  is  regarded  as  a  compact  be- 
tween the  States,  to  be  carried  out  by  them  respectively, 
according  to  their  interpretation  of  its  obligations,  with- 
out intervention  of  Congress,  then  tlie  other  must  be  so 
regarded ;  nor  can  any  legislative  power  be  asserted  of 
Congi-ess  under  one  clause  which  is  denied  under  the 
other.  This  proposition  cannot  be  questioned.  Now 
mark  the  consequences. 

Congi'ess,  in  abstaining  from  all  exercise  of  power 
under  the  first  clause,  when  required  to  protect  the 
liberty  of  colored  citizens,  while  assuming  power  under 
the  second  clause,  in  order  to  obtain  the  surrender  of 
fugitive  slaves,  shows  an  inconsistency,  which  becomes 
more  monstrous  when  it  is  considered  that  in  the  one 
case  the  general  and  commanding  interests  of  Liberty 
axe  neglected,  while  in  the  other  the  peculiar  and  sub- 
ordinate interests  of  Slavery  are  carefully  assured ;  and 
such  an  exercise  of  power  is  an  alarmuig  evidence  of 
that  influence  of  Slavery  in  the  National  Government 
which  has  increased,  is  increasing,  and  ought  to  be  over- 
thrown. 

LooMng  more  precisely  at  these  two  clauses,  we  ar- 
rive at  the  true  conclusion.  According  to  express  words 
of  the  Constitution,  in  the  Tenth  Amendment,  "the  pow- 
ers not  del^ated  to  the  United  States  by  the  Constitu- 


■cibyGooglc 


REPEAL   OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLATE  ACT.  537 

tioo,  nor  proliibited  "by  it  to  the  States,  are  reserved  to 
the  States  respectively,  or  to  the  people  "  ;  and  since  no 
powers  are  delegated  to  the  United  States  in  the  clause 
relatii^  to  "  privilegea  and  immunities  of  citizens,"  or 
in  the  associate  clause  of  the  same  section,  relating 
to  the  surrender  of  "  persons  held  to  service  oi  labor," 
therefore  all  legislation  by  Coi^ress,  under  either  clause, 
must  be  an  assumption  of  undelegated  powers,  and  an 
infraction  of  rights  secured  to  the  States  respectively, 
or  to  the  people :  and  such,  I  have  already  said,  is  the 
Fugitive  Slave  Act. 

I  might  go  further,  and,  by  the  example  of  South 
Carolina,  vindicate  to  Massachusetts,  and  every  other 
State,  the  r^ht  to  put  such  interpretation  upon  the 
"fugitive"  clause  as  it  shall  think  proper.  The  le- 
gislature of  South  CaroKna,  in  a  series  of  resolutions 
adopted  in  1844,  asserts  the  followuig  proposition:  — 

"  Resolved,  That  free  negroes  and  peraons  of  color  are  not 
citizens  of  the  Uaited  States  within  the  meaning  of  the  Consti- 
tution, which  confers  upon  the  citizens  of  one  State  the  privi- 
lege and  immunities  of  citizens  in  the  several  States."  ^ 

Here  is  a  distinct  assumption  of  right  to  determine 
the  persons  to  whom  certain  words  of  the  Constitu- 
tion are  applicable.  Now  notliing  can  be  clearer  than 
this :  If  South  Carolina  may  determine  for  itself  whether 
the  clause  relating  to  the  "  privileges  and  immunities  of 
citizens  "  be  applicable  to  colored  citizens  of  the  several 
States,  and  may  solemnly  deny. its  applicability,  then 
may  Massachusetts,  and  every  other  State,  determine  for 
itself  -whether  the  other  clause,  relating  to  the  surrender 


■cibyGoogIc 


538  THK  DEMANDS   OF  FREEDOM  ; 

of  "  persons  held  to  service  or  labor,"  be  really  applica- 
ble to  fugitive  slaves,  and  may  solemnly  deny  its  appli- 
cability. 

Mr.  President,  I  have  aaid  enough  to  show  the  usur- 
pation by  Congress  under  the  "  fugitive  "  clause  of  the 
Constitution,  and  to  ■warn  you  against  abetting  this 
usurpation.  But  I  have  left  untouched  those  other 
outrages,  many  and  great,  which  enter  into  the  existing 
Fugitive  Slave  Act,  among  which  are  the  denial  of  trial 
by  jury,  the  denial  of  the  writ  of  Habeas  Corpus,  the 
authorization  of  judgment  on  ex  parte  evidence  with- 
out the  safeguard  of  eross-examiimtion,  and  the  surren- 
der of  the  great  question  of  Human  Freedom  to  be  de- 
termined by  a  mere  Commissioner,  who,  according  to 
the  requirement  of  the  Constitution,  ia  grossly  incom- 
petent to  any  such  service.  I  have  also  left  untouched 
the  hateful  character  of  this  enactment,  as  a  barefaced 
subversion  of  every  principle  of  humanity  and  justice. 
And  now.  Sir,  we  are  asted  to  lend  ourselves  anew  to 
this  enormity,  worthy  only  of  indignant  condemnation ; 
we  are  asked  to  impart  new  life  to  this  pretended  law, 
this  false  Act  of  Congress,  this  counterfeit  enactment, 
this  monstrosity  of  legislation,  which  draws  no  life  from 
the  Constitution,  as  it  clearly  draws  no  life  from  that 
Supreme  Law  which  is  the  essential  fountain  of  life  to 
every  human  law. 

Sir,  the  bill  before  you  may  have  the  approval  of  Con- 
gress ;  and  in  yet  other  ways  you  may  seek  to  sustain 
the  Fugitive  Slave  Act.  But  it  will  be  iu  vain.  You 
undertake  what  no  l^islation  can  accompHsb.  Courts 
may  come  forward,  and  lend  it  their  sanction.  All 
this,  too,  wUl  be  in  vain.  I  respect  the  learning  of 
judges ;  I  reverence  the  virtue,  more  than  learning,  by 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  TIIE  FUGITrVE  SLAVE  ACT.  539 

which  tlieir  lives  are  often  adorned.  Nor  leaa^ing,  nor 
virtue,  when,  with  mistaken  force,  hent  to  this  pur- 
pose, can  avail.  I  assert  confidently,  Sir,  and  ask  the 
Senate  to  note  my  assertion,  tliat  there  is  no  court,  how- 
soever endowed  with  judicial  qnahties  or  surrounded 
by  public  confidence,  which  is  strong  enough  to  lift  this 
Act  into  permanent  consideration  or  respect.  It  may 
seem  for  a  moment  to  accomplish  the  feat.  Its  de- 
cision may  be  enforced,  amidst  tears  and  agonies.  A 
feUow-man  may  be  reduced  anew  to  slavery.  But  all 
will  be  in  vain.  Tiiis  Act  cannot  be  upheld.  Anything 
90  entirely  vile,  so  absolutely  atrocious,  would  dr^  an 
angel  down.  Sir,  it  must  drag  down  every  court  or 
judge  venturing  to  sustain  it. 

And  yet,  Sir,  in  zeal  for  tliis  enormity.  Senators  an- 
nounce their  purpose  to  break  down  the  recent  legis- 
lation of  States,  calculated  to  shield  the  liberty  of  the 
citizen.  "  It  is  difficult,"  says  Burke,  "  to  frame  an  in- 
dictment against  a  whole  people."  But  here  in  the  Sen- 
ate, where  are  convened  the  jealous  representatives  of 
the  States,  we  hear  whole  States  arraigned,  as  if  already 
guilty  of  crime.  The  Senator  from  Louisiana  [Mr.  Ben- 
jamin], in  plaintive  tones  sets  forth  the  ground  of  pro- 
ceeding, and  more  than  one  State  is  summoned  to  judg- 
ment. It  would  be  easy  to  show,  by  critical  inquiry, 
that  this  whole  chaise  is  without  just  foundation,  and 
that  all  the  legislation  so  much  condemned  is  as  clearly 
defensible  under  the  Constitution  as  it  is  meritorious  in 
purposa 

Sir,  the  only  crime  of  these  States  is,  that  Liberty  is 
placed  before  Slavery.  Follow  the  chaise,  point  by  point, 
and  this  is  apparent.  In  securing  to  every  person  claimed 
as  slave  the  protection  of  trial  by  jury  and  the  Haheas 


■cibyGoogIc 


540  TUB   DEMANDS   OF  FHEEDOM  I 

Corp'its,  they  simply  provide  safeguards  stnctly  within  the 
province  of  every  State,  and  rendered'  necessaiy  by  the 
usurpation  of  the  Fugitive  Act.  In  securing  the  aid  of 
counsel  to  every  person  claimed  as  slave,  they  but  per- 
forrd  a  kindly  duty,  which  no  phrase  orwoi-d  in  the  Con- 
stitution can  be  tortured  to  condemn.  In  visiting  ■with 
severe  penalties  every  malicious  effort  to  reduce  a  fellow- 
man  to  slavery,  they  respond  to  the  best  feelings  of  the 
human  heart.  In  prohibiting  the  use  of  county  jails 
and  buildings  as  barracoons  and  slave-pens, — in  prohib- 
iting alt  public  officera,  holding  the  commission  of  tlie 
State,  in  any  capacity,  -whether  as  Chief  Justice  or  Jus- 
tice' of  the  Peace,  whether  as  Governor  or  Constable, 
from  any  service  as  slave-hunter,  —  in  prohibiting  the 
mhinteer  militia  of  the  State,  in  its  organized  foi-ra,  from 
any  such  service,  the  States  simply  exercise  a  power 
under  the  Constitution,  recognized  by  the  Supreme 
Court  of  the  United  States  even  -while  upholding  Sla- 
very in  the  fatal  PriffCf  case,  by  positive  PROfflBiTioN, 
to  withdraw  its  own  officers  from  this  offensive  busi- 
ness. 

For  myself,  let  me  say  that  I  loot  with  no  pleasure  on 
any  possibility  of  conflict  between  the  two  jurisdictions 
of  State  and  Nation ;  but  I  trust,  that,  if  the  interests  of 
Freedom  so  require,  the  States  will  not  hesitate.  From 
the  beginning  of  this  controversy,  I  have  sought,  as  I 
still  seek,  to  awaken  another  influence,  which,  without 
the  possibility  of  conflict,  wiU  be  mightier  than  any 
Act  of  Congress  or  the  sword  of  the  National  Govern- 
ment :  I  mean  an  enlightened,  generous,  humane.  Chris- 
tian public  opinion,  which  shall  blast  with  contempt, 
indignation,  and  abhorrence  all  who,  in  whatever  form 
or  under  whatever  name,  undertake  to  be  agents  in 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  541 

enslaving  a  fellow-man.  Sir,  such  an  opinion  you 
,cannot  bind  or  subdue.  Against  its  subtile,  pervasive 
influence  your  legislation  and  the  decrees  of  courts  will 
be  powerless.  Already  in  Massachusetts,  I  am  proud  to 
beheve,  it  begins  to  prevail;  and  the  Fugitive  Act  there 
will  soon  be  a  dead  letter. 

Mr.  President,  since  things  are  so,  it  were  well  to 
remove  this  Act  from  our  statute-book,  that  it  may  no 
longer  exist  as  an  occasion  of  Ul-will  and  a  point  of 
conflict  Let  the  North  be  relieved  from  this  usurpa^ 
tion,  and  the  iirat  step  will  be  taken  towards  permanent 
iiaimony.  The  Senator  from  Louisiana  [Mr.  Benjamin] 
has  proclaimed  anew  to-night,  what  he  has  before  de- 
■clared  on  this  floor,  "that  Slavery  is  a  subject  with 
which  the  Federal  Government  has  nothing  to  do."  I 
thank  him  for  teaching  the  Senate  that  word.  Ti-ue, 
most  true.  Sir,  ours  is  a  Government  of  Freedom,  having 
nothing  t^  do  witli  Slaveiy.  This  is  the  doctrine  which 
I  have  ever  maintained,  and  am  happy  to  find  recog- 
nized in  fonn,  if  not  in  reality,  by  the  Senator  from 
Louisiana,  Tlie  Senator  then  proceeded  to  declare  that 
"all  that  the  South  asks  is  to  be  let  alone."  This  re- 
quest is  moderate.  And  I  say,  for  the  North,  that  all 
■we  ask  is  to  be  let  alone.  Yes,  Sir,  let  us  alone.  Do 
not  involve  us  in  the  support  of  Slavery.  Hug  the 
viper  to  your  bosoms,  if  you  perversely  will,  within  your 
own  States,  until,  it  stings  you  to  a  generous  remorse, 
but  do  not  compel  ua  to  hug  it  too ;  for  this,  I  assure 
yon,  we  can  never  do. 

The  Senator  from  Louisiana,  with  these  professions 
on  his  lips,  proceeds  to  ask,  doubtless  with  complete 
sincerity,  but  in  strai^e  forgetfulness  of  our  country's 
history :    "  Did  we  ever  bring  this  subject  into  Con- 


■cibyGooglc 


542  THE  DEMANDS   OF  FREEDOM  : 

gress?"  Yes,  Sir,  that  was  his  inquiry,  —  as  if  there 
was  any  moment,  from  the  earliest  days  of  the  Republic, 
■when  the  supporters  of  Slavery  ceased  to  bring  this  sub- 
ject into  Congress.  Almost  from  the  beginning  it  has 
been  here,  through  the  exercise  of  usurped  pow&r,  no- 
where given  under  the  Constitution ;  for  I  am  glaij  to 
believe  that  the  Constitution  of  my  country  contains  no 
words  out  of  which  Slavery,  or  the  power  to  support 
Slavery,  can  be  derived ;  and  this  conclusion,  I  doubt 
not,  win  yet  be  affirmed  by  the  courts.  And  yet  the 
honorable  Senator  asks,  "Did  we  ever  bring  this  sub- 
ject into  Congress  ? "  The  answer  shall  be  plain  and 
explicit.  Sir,  you  brought  Slavery  into  Congress,  when, 
shortly  after  the  adoption  of  the  Constitution,  you  sanc- 
tioned it  in  the  District  of  Columbia,  within  the  nation- 
al jurisdiction,  and  adopted  that  barbarous  slave  code, 
still  extant  on  your  statute-book,  which  the  Senator 
from  Connecticut  [Mr.  Gillette]  so  eloquently  exposed 
to-night.  Tou  brought  Slavery  into  Congress,  when,  at 
the  same  period,  you  accepted  the  cession  of  territories 
from  North  Carolina  and  Geoigia,  now  constituting 
States  of  the  Union,  with  conditions  in  favor  of  Sla- 
very, and  thus  began  to  sanction  Slavery  in  territories 
within  the  exclusive  jurisdiction  of  Congress.  Tou 
brought  Slavery  into  Congress,  when,  at  different  times, 
you  usurped  a  power,  not  given  by  the  Constitution, 
over  fugitive  slaves,  and  by  most  offensive  legislation 
thrust  your  arms  into  distant  Northern  homes.  Tou 
brought  Slavery  into  Congress,  when,  by  express  legis- 
lation, you  regulated  the  coastwise  slave-trade,  and  thus 
threw  the  national  shield  over  a  traffic  on  the  coast 
of  the  United  States  M'hich  on  the  coast  of  Congo  you 
justly  brand  as  "piracy."     You  brought  Slavery  into 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OE   TUB   FUGITIVE   SLAVE  ACT.  543 

Congi'ess,  ■when,  from  time  t  t  me  you  soUqI  t  to  iiitro 
duce  new  States  with  alaveholJii j.  Const t  tons  into 
the  National  Union.  And,  perm  t  me  to  aay  S  y 
brought  Slavery  into  Congiess  vhen  yo  e  lied  p 
us,  as  you  have  done  even  at  tl  a  eiy  se  on  to  j  dy 
for  slaves,  and  thus,  in  defiance  of  a  carim  1  prm  pi 
of  the  Constitution,  pressed  the  Nat  o  al  C  ovem  ne  t 
to  recognize  property  in  n  an  An  1  yet  the  Sen  tor 
from  Louisiana,  with  strange  s  mplic  ty  say?  that  the 
South  only  asks  to  be  let  ilone  S  the  1  n  ralle 
Senator  borrows  the  languaj,e  of  tie  Noil  wh  I  at 
each  of  these  usurpations,  e  1  ms  Let  us  alo  e 
And  let  me  say,  frankly,  tl  at  pea  e  n  never  p  evail 
until  you  do  let  us  alone,  ■ —  nt  1  tl  s  subject  of  Slav 
ery  is  banished  from  Congre  s  by  tl  e  tr  nf  1  of  Fiee 
dom,  —  until  Slavery  is  dri  en  fr  m    ts  ped  foot 

hold,  and  Freedom  is  made  nat  o  al  nsteil  of  to  I 
—  and  until  the  National  Go  emment  bro  ht  1  a  k 
to  the  precise  position  it  oc  ^  ed  o  the  lay  th  t 
Washington  took  his   first   o  tl  I  es  lent   ot   tl 

United  States,  when  there  v  s  no  P  t  e  Act  anl 
the  national  flag,  as  it  floated  over  the  national  terri- 
tory within  the  jurisdiction  of  Congress,  nowhere  cov- 
ered a  single  slave. 

And  now.  Sir,  as  an  effort  in  the  true  direction  of 
the  Constitution,  in  the  hope  of  beginning  the  divorce 
of  the  National  Government  from  Slavery,  and  to  re- 
move all  occasion  for  the  proposed  measure  under  con- 
sideration, I  shall  close  these  remarks  with  a  motion 
to  repeal  the  Fugitive  Act.  Twice  already,  since  I 
have  had  the  honor  of  a  seat  in  tliis  chamber,  I  have 
pressed  that  question  to  a  vote,  and  I  mean  to  press 
it  again  to-night    After  the  protracted  discussion  in- 


■cibyGooglc 


544  THE   DEMANDS    OF   FEEEDOM : 

volving  the  character  of  this  enactment,  such  a  motion 
belongs  logically  to  thia  occaaion,  and  fitly  closes  its 
proceedings. 

At  a  former  session,  on  introducing  this  proposition, 
I  discussed  it  at  length,  in  an  argument  which  I  fear- 
lessly assert  never  has  heen  answered,  and  now,  in  this 
debate,  I  have  already  touched  upon  various  objections. 
There  are  yet  other  things  which  might  be  urged.  I 
might  exhibit  abuses  which  have  occurred  under  the 
fugitive  Act,  —  the  number  of  free  persons  it  has 
doomed  to  Slavery,  the  riots  it  has  provoked,  the  brutal 
conduct  of  its  officers,  the  distress  it  has  scattered,  the 
derangement  of  business  it  has  caused,  —  interfering 
even  with  the  administration  of  justice,  changing  court- 
houses into  barracks  and  barracoons,  and  filling  streets 
with  armed  men,  amidst  which  law  is  silent.  All  these 
things  I  might  expose.  But  in  these  hurried  moments 
I  forbear.  Suffice  it  to  say,  that  the  proposition  to  re- 
peal the  existing  Fugitive  Act  stands  on  fundamental 
principles  which  no  debate  or  opposition  can  shake. 

There  are  considerations  belonging  to  the  present 
period  which  give  new  strength  to  this  proposition. 
Pubhc  Opinion,  which,  under  a  popular  government, 
makes  and  unmakes  laws,  and  which  for  a  time  was 
passive  and  acquiescent,  now  lifts  itself  everywhere  in 
the  States  where  the  Act  is  sought  to  be  enforced,  and 
demands  a  change.  Already  three  States,  Ehode  Island, 
Connecticut,  and  Michigan,  by  formal  resolutions  pre- 
sented to  the  Senate,  have  concurred  in  this  demand. 
Tribunals  of  law  are  joining  at  last  with  the  people. 
The  Superior  Court  of  Cincinnati  has  denied  the  power 
of  Congress  over  this  subject.  And  now,  almost  while 
I  speak,  comes  the  solemn  judgment  of  the  Supreme 


■cibyGoogIc 


EEPEAL  Of  THE  lUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  545 

Court  of  Wisconsin,  deKvered  after  elaborate  argument, 
on  successive  occasions,  before  a  single  judge,  aud  then 
before  the  whole  bench,  declaring  this  Acta  violation 
of  the  Constitntion.  lu  response  to  public  opinion, 
broad  and  general,  if  not  universal,  at  the  North,  swell- 
ing alike  from  village  and  city,  from  seaboard  and  lake, 
— judiciaJly  attested,  legislatively  declared,  and  repre- 
sented also  by  numerous  petitions  from  good  men  with- 
out distinction  of  party,  —  in  response  to  this  Public 
Opinion,  as  weE  as  in  obedience  to  my  own  fixed  con- 
■  t'  n  I  d  m  't  1  d  ty  not  tr  lose  this  opportunity 
f  p  th       p    1    1  th    P      t        SI        At 

n        ui   n  th    Se     t       I  &      t      til         t    11 

ft     th  t         1  th    1      1       1  11       d  t 

t    dth  1     — 

Tl    t   th     A  t     f  C     "T  PI        d    S  t       y       1 

1850  lly  kii  w  th      F  g  t       SI         4  t     b  I 

tb      an  1       by       p  al  d 

A  d    n  tl  t        I      L  th    J  1      y 

O        kfehsc       JISm  fU       lliMLl 

atlCl  hhll  ig  rrl 

MB.BEB.MPdtIb  d        fntt 

t       1  d  ff  If       tl  m      1        th      p  wl     I 

t  tl  tl  m      fr       M         h      tt        t  -t  h     t 

I  hmid        t     tdtbidywd   with  h 

Htlfcusflwa.dp       Itmt       thCnttt 
fthitdStt        btflw       tpttohm      j      t 

wlw    Ha-khm        whhh    php    wuldnt 
w     m    h        tly 

Mr.  Sun     K.     I  w  tl       w        y  q      t 

Mit  B  Tl       I     k  J       1         tl        w  wh  th        U 


fO     gr 


fth    q      t  ull 


■cibyGoogIc 


54S  THE  DEMANDS  OP  FREEDOM; 

recommend  to  Masaauhiisetta  to  pass  a  law  to  deliver  up 
fugitives  from  slavery  1 

Mr.  Sumner.  T'  Senator  asks  me  a  question,  and  I  an- 
swer, franltly,  that  no  temptation,  no  inducement,  would 
draw  me  in  any  way  to  sanction  tlie  return  of  any  man  to 
slavery.  Others  will  speak  for  themselves.  In  this  respect 
I  apeak  for  myself. 

Mr.  Butlkr.  I  do  not  rise  now  at  all  to  question  the 
right  of  the  gentleman  from  Massachusetts  to  hold  his  seat, 
under  the  obligation  of  the  Constitution  of  the  United  States, 
with  the  opinions  which  he  has  expressed ;  but,  if  I  under- 
stand him,  he  means,  that,  whether  this  law  or  that  law  or 
any  other  law  prevails,  he  disregards  the  obligations  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States. 

Mb.  Sumner.  Not  at  alL  That  I  never  said.  I  recog- 
nize the  obligations  of  the  Constitution. 

Mr.  Butler.  He  says  he  recognizes  the  obligations  of  the 
Constitution  of  the  United  States.  I  see,  I  know  he  is  not 
a  tactician,  and  I  shall  not  take  advantage  of  the  infirmity 
of  a  man  who  docs  not  know  half  his  time  exactly  what  he 
is  about  [Lauc/hter.]  But,  Sir,  I  will  ask  that  gentleman 
one  question :  If  it  devolved  upon  him  as  a  representative 
of  Massachusetts,  aU  Federal  laws  being  put  out  of  the  way, 
would  he  recommend  any  law  for  the  delivery  of  a  fugitive 
slave  und     tl     C      1 1  t         f  tl     Un  t  d  St  t     1 

Mk.  S    n,  N 

Mr.Ble        Ikwtht      NwS      Ih  t 

actly  wh  t      th    t     th       d  wl    t  I     t     d    h  U  g    f  -th  t 
the  South        St  t  Wh      th  tl  t  Ik 

the  way  Id         Ih  t        Ikh  Aym         h 

comes  u]  h       w  tl       pi  1     tl     py  t     t  w  tl    wl    t 

is  pra«ti    Ijt  111-tIlnt  titl        n 

him,  —  I  Iwd,  —  btbyh 

1  CongrassionHl  Globe,  33d  Cong.  2d  Sesa.,  Appendrx,  Vol.  XXXI.  p.  246. 
The  tone  of  Senator  Butler  on  tliis  cKcasion  shows  the  intolerable  spirit  of 
Slavery,  which  ivonid  not  endure  Jlr.  Snmner. 


■cibyGoogIc 


REPEAL  OF  THE  FUGITIVE  SLAVE  ACT.  647 

The  queetioii,  being  taken  hj  yeas  and  nays  on  the  amendment  of- 
fered by  Mr.  Sumaer,  reEjiilted.  —  yeas  9,  nays  30,  —  as  follows. 

Yeas.  — Messrs.  Brainerd,  Chftse,  Cooper,  Fesseudeu,  GiUette,  Sew- 
ard, Sumner,  Vi'ade,  and  Wilson,  —9. 

Nays. —Messrs.  Adams,  Badger,  Bayard,  Bell,  Benjamin,  Bright, 
Brown  Butler,  Clay,  Dawson,  Douglas,  Fitqmtrick,  Geyer,  Gwin, 
Hunter,  Jones,  of  Iowa,  Jones,  of  Tennessee,  MiOloiy,  Mason,  Morton, 
Pearee,  Pettit,  Rusk,  Sebastian,  Shields,  SlideU,  Thomson,  of  New 
Jersey,  Toncey,  WeUer,  and  Wright,  —30. 

So  the  amendment  was  rejected. 


END   OF  VOLUME  Ul. 


imbridge:  Elecirolyped  aod  Prin 


■cibyGoogIc 


;db,Googlc